MI MI - Danielle Stislicki, 28, Southfield, 2 Dec 2016 #9

[thekarmabus]

Deceased , manslaughter. I do not believe it was pre meditated. Something went terribly wrong at his home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gam]

Danielle Stislicki has been missing for more than seven weeks. What is the general consensus here regarding her status?

Alive or deceased?

If alive, where is she? Who is keeping her away from her family and friends?

If deceased, was it accidental or was DS murdered?

If a homicide, what was the motive?

Not putting the word.

Does not apply because of previous answer.

Does not matter at this point, accidental at this stage is murder in my book. DS is still nowhere to be found.

SG went after someone that backed away. If someone else, they were pissed and took it out on the wrong person.

 

[attendant lord]

I'm new to WS but have read the threads here and elsewhere and have been following this case closely. What I'm still not clear on is: why aren't search parties being organized to look for her/possibly her body? Have I missed some statements from LE or family on this? I heard elsewhere that family has asked for people to NOT search, but I cannot find a reference or reason.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I'm new to WS but have read the threads here and elsewhere and have been following this case closely. What I'm still not clear on is: why aren't search parties being organized to look for her/possibly her body? Have I missed some statements from LE or family on this? I heard elsewhere that family has asked for people to NOT search, but I cannot find a reference or reason.

:welcome: and thanks for your comments. LE must have reasons for not conducting searches. We'll have to be patient and will eventually understand their rationale.

 

[Rachel1]

Could a reason be that they believe DS is deceased? Just thinking aloud

 

[Rachel1]

IMO -
I believe DS is deceased. SG is perp and it was not premeditated. I believe something went wrong.
This is just my opinion and I have no proof to back it up.

 

[attendant lord]

That's partially my point. If they believe she is deceased, I would assume finding the body would be paramount.

I was hoping someone with more experience with investigations who knows about standard investigative procedure might outline under what circumstances LE seeks public assistance searching for victims (generally speaking, without speculating about this case necessarily).

 

[nonanks]

Deceased
I don't believe it was premeditated. I think he lured her in some way expecting her to actions to be different and they weren't, he feared she would tell so he then did the unthinkable

 

[Ozoner]

I am still hoping that Danielle is somehow alive, despite the odds.

LE certainly believes the crime was pre-planned:
"A law enforcement official told FoxNews.com that investigators believe Stislicki was abducted after leaving work at the MetLife building in Southfield -- a northern suburb of Detroit -- where she works alongside her mother as a consultant."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/0...-home-in-hunt-for-missing-michigan-woman.html

LE would not use the word abducted if they believed in a crime-of-passion/fit-of rage scenario.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

That's partially my point. If they believe she is deceased, I would assume finding the body would be paramount.

I was hoping someone with more experience with investigations who knows about standard investigative procedure might outline under what circumstances LE seeks public assistance searching for victims (generally speaking, without speculating about this case necessarily).

If DS is deceased, LE would not want public searches due to evidence being tampered with or destroyed. In this particular case, LE must have reason to believe that public searches would not be helpful and might even hinder the ongoing investigation. IIRC, there were cursory searches initially, but I don't know for certain whether the public was invited or involved in the process.

 

[crhedBngr]

Danielle Stislicki has been missing for more than seven weeks. What is the general consensus here regarding her status?

Alive or deceased?

If alive, where is she? Who is keeping her away from her family and friends?

If deceased, was it accidental or was DS murdered?

If a homicide, what was the motive?

As much as I DON'T want to believe it, unfortunately, she may be deceased.

It's my understanding (please feel free to correct me) that the longer a person goes missing, the slimmer the chances of them being found alive.

Also, I don't think this was premeditated--it was accidental. And, I think the "relationship" between DS and SG was viewed very differently by each. Danielle possibly saw SG as a coworker, someone with whom she could occasionally chat, and he was nothing more than a coworker to her. I believe SG interpreted her attention(s) very differently--he maybe thought she was interested in him as more than just a coworker or "friend". He may have made a pass (or several passes) at her; she did not respond to his attentions, which possibly frustrated him. Adding to his possible frustrations was his wife's illness.

Going on what DS's parents said, DS was a very helpful person. SG may have asked her for a ride back to his place; possibly telling her he needed to pick up something for his wife, playing up his wife's illness. (I think she went into the hospital that same week?) DS obliged; once at SG's residence, things maybe went very wrong; hence LE's testing of the mattress.

Motive? Possible anger at her rejection; frustration because his wife was in the hospital.

All of the above is MHO.

Mods, feel free to snip or correct.

I inserted the graphic below, just to let Dani know I'm thinking of her.

 

[inmyhumbleopinion]

Deceased, intentional, wondering if he might be a serial killer.

I do wonder if he has done this before or something similar but did not go quite as far.

I don't believe this was exactly a crime of passion; I don't think it was entirely impulsive.

I believe he intended to violate Danielle in some way that day, and when he realized she wasn't going to go along with it and thus he was not going to get his way, he decided she had to be punished. Like, " If you don't do as I say, you will regret it." I do suspect he got angry, but I don't think he completely lost it. And I believe once he made a decision on how he was going to punish her -I'm sorry, but no, I do not believe she is with us any longer ...-, he rather enjoyed it.

I don't believe this was one of those situations in which say, a man tries to rape a woman, she refuses, he freaks out and kills her out of fear that she will go to LE, he will likely be arrested, his wife and everyone else is going to find out, etc. I think this was more about -in his twisted mind- her not respecting him.

I do believe he had help, and whatever role this person played (transporting her, giving him a ride at some point, etc.), they didn't know what they were helping him with. I do think that by now, the person would have put the two and two together but they may be too afraid of the perpetrator to come forward.

Purely speculative on my part.

ETA: And I do think that he was rather meticulous in covering it up, but not enough. They will get him.

 

[Elle*Bee]

I am still hoping that Danielle is somehow alive, despite the odds.

LE certainly believes the crime was pre-planned:
"A law enforcement official told FoxNews.com that investigators believe Stislicki was abducted after leaving work at the MetLife building in Southfield -- a northern suburb of Detroit -- where she works alongside her mother as a consultant."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/01/0...-home-in-hunt-for-missing-michigan-woman.html

LE would not use the word abducted if they believed in a crime-of-passion/fit-of rage scenario.

Suppose the abduction (the reporter's term in this particular article*) was spur of the moment? Could the perp have wanted to talk to DS, she declined and he snapped. (Not my prevailing theory, btw) The attempt to talk to her: premeditated. The abduction, not necessarily so.

*In this article, the reporter was paraphrasing the unnamed LE source, not directly quoting. Maybe the source used the word abduct, or another word the reporter interpreted as abduct. I don't think it really matters in this case because I believe DS was indeed abducted, but I do wish reporters would use more direct quotes, IMO.

 

[monkeypants]

Ok. Because choice of words is extremely important in cases like this, especially words used by LE (and sometimes the family), I wanted to point something out. We have been told that LE does not believe that she parked her vehicle. There has been plenty of other info and "stories" coming out of SM, but along with the LE statement, one thing is clear. No one ever says that whoever parked the vehicle was alone. And no one ever says that DS wasn't in the vehicle when it was parked. We do not know that DS wasn't in the car when it returned to IG. There have been no statements regarding its ETA. So, it could be plausible that SG and DS (or even others) were in the vehicle when it returned. Of all of the rumors about SG being seen in a vehicle with DS and whatnot, there is never a time given. Until we have more facts, I don't think it's fair to the case that we just "assume" that DS never made it back to her apartment, or that saying that she didn't park the car somehow implies that she was not in it, or that something happened before it was returned. I just think it's good to keep an open mind until we have ACTUAL facts to back up theories.

NOTE: If I missed anything in MSM, please feel free to share it. I do not recall any info from LE or MSM that would contradict what I've written.

If Dani was in her car when it was returned, why wasn't she driving? Why were her purse etc left in the car but the car was locked? Is your theory she came back and left again? If so was it voluntary? Just trying to follow your theory.
It jogs along one of my other theories, so just curious your angle to see if we are on same path

 

[thekarmabus]

If Dani was in her car when it was returned, why wasn't she driving? Why were her purse etc left in the car but the car was locked? Is your theory she came back and left again? If so was it voluntary? Just trying to follow your theory.
It jogs along one of my other theories, so just curious your angle to see if we are on same path

LE has stated they don't believe she drove car to her apartment. Her car was parked in "her spot" in 100's to choose from. That either means she was in the car and told them/him where to park or two he had been there before either invited or stalker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tmmac]

What a good point about when the term "abducted" is used. I keep seeing people suggest that maybe she went to his house willingly and then a third party showed up and then something terrible went down. If she were abducted after work like article states, that doesn't fit a sudden act of unplanned violence happened when a third party showed up.

 

[tmmac]

So how do you think they came of with the term abduction if it were just that something went wrong?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Abducted suggests to me that Danielle was forced into a vehicle against her will and/or threatened to cooperate. Such action would be opposed to Danielle getting into a vehicle willingly and inviting someone to get into the car with her. :moo:

 

[monkeypants]

Riddle me this.......

There is nothing to indicate foul play, the lieutenant said.

The reason she is missing is not the issue. Her safety is the concern, he said.

 

[tmmac]

That was said initially. Then it was said she was the victim of a crime (that would indicate foul play). Then it was stated she was abducted. Now the reason she is missing has everything to do with getting her back. How she went missing tells you how to look for her. IMO at this point they are looking for a dead body and I'm sure they still would like to bring her home even if she is no longer with us.