OR OR - Stephanie Warner, 43, Ruch, 4 Jul 2013 - #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lilibet said:
Yes, he was last seen May 29 but the story didn't run until early August. I'm thinking people must have thought he was away if they didn't report him missing sooner.
Click to expand...

I also see he's got quite the rap sheet.
 
I just called the newsrooms of all three TV stations and no one knows about an interview.

A reporter at one of the stations wanted to know if there was anything new going on. I told her that they were no longer at the property, and about the arrest. She said they had gone out there to interview him early on, but decided not to because it seemed dangerous. I told her about the radical videos, which she wasn't aware of. She said to call her if I learn anything new because they don't hear much and as she put it "We like to poke around." I told her that it really needs more coverage.
 
Don't post much as I can only jump in here and there between work. I do check the posts every day and keep Stephanie in my prayers. Great job on the FB page and I have also Liked!
 
Lilibet said:
I just called the newsrooms of all three TV stations and no one knows about an interview.

A reporter at one of the stations wanted to know if there was anything new going on. I told her that they were no longer at the property, and about the arrest. She said they had gone out there to interview him early on, but decided not to because it seemed dangerous. I told her about the radical videos, which she wasn't aware of. She said to call her if I learn anything new because they don't hear much and as she put it "We like to poke around." I told her that it really needs more coverage.
Click to expand...

An online background check on Lonnie is a good place to start. Reporters are usually all over a POI's background. So far, we've uncovered:
  • unlawfully residing on public land (Convicted)
  • possible armed robbery (possibly Wyoming)
  • evictions
  • arson threats, reportedly
The journalist who shows the most continued interest should be given exclusives when the time comes.

And the time will come.
 
Neptune said:
An online background check on Lonnie is a good place to start. Reporters are usually all over a POI's background. So far, we've uncovered:
  • unlawfully residing on public land (Convicted)
  • possible armed robbery (possibly Wyoming)
  • evictions
  • arson threats
The journalist who shows the most continued interest should be given exclusives when the time comes.

And the time will come.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Lilibet... You should definitely have told him/her about the arson thing you uncovered. Or at least point them to this forum. Maybe call back? Although, any truly interested journalist worth their salt is already reading this...It comes up in on the first page when you google Stephanie.
 
OUOTP said:
Yeah, Lilibet... You should definitely have told him/her about the arson thing you uncovered. Or at least point them to this forum. Maybe call back? Although, any truly interested journalist worth their salt is already reading this...It comes up in on the first page when you google Stephanie.
Click to expand...

I really didn't feel comfortable talking about the arson threat (hearsay) or WS (not sure what the rules are). If I'd known she was going to be asking questions I would have made a list of talking points. :) I'm not going to call back. That's not a direction I really want to go. And as you say, a quick google would bring any truly interested news person here.
 
Lilibet said:
I really didn't feel comfortable talking about the arson threat (hearsay) or WS (not sure what the rules are).
Click to expand...

I added the word "reportedly" Lilibet to my post -- because you're right, a person can say this, but it may be fiction. I'll remove the arson comment altogether, if you prefer. I believe there's still time. And, I should add, we don't know about the evictions, although those would be public record. Or the robbery. So, these were things that were mentioned to a sleuther and found online by a sleuther, but not confirmed as true. Unless we can find court docs or a police report that prove otherwise.
 
Neptune said:
I added the word "reportedly" Lilibet to my post -- because you're right, a person can say this, but it may be fiction. I'll remove the arson comment altogether, if you prefer. I believe there's still time. And, I should add, we don't know about the evictions, although those would be public record. Or the robbery. So, these were things that were mentioned to a sleuther and found online by a sleuther, but not confirmed as true. Unless we can find court docs or a police report that prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

Your change looks fine, Neptune. I suppose the reporter could follow up and confirm all this on her own if I gave her the leads.

I'm just wary of going further with this. Both my husband and I were misquoted in local papers years ago in two separate stories. They weren't serious errors, but the reporters basically made stuff up. I don't trust that my privacy and anonymity would be respected. So I will stay behind the scenes.
 
Lilibet said:
Just as I hung up, that thought occurred to me. I wonder if they'd give one. Their silence just isn't normal. I get the sense LE has put a tight lid on this and told them not to talk. But why?
Click to expand...

OK, here's a challenge to y'all... find any other missing person case investigation (Websleuths has numerous cases nationwide) that has not put a family member in front of a camera.

If local law enforcement has prevented the family from making an appeal to the public, or if the family does not feel an appeal is necessary -- let's just say, of all the active missing persons cases in the country, this case would be highly unusual.

So, is Stephanie's case extraordinarily different from all the others? If so, there had better be a surprising and exceptional outcome to all this -- a big "ah-ha, now we get it" moment. Or, is LE stuck at Square One for a reason and can only wish, having now realized the devoted interest in the woman from Ruch, they could go back two months? They can't go back -- but they can have a "do-over" -- release the information now. I want the timespan between the Jul 4 late to Jul 5 early start/stop engine reports. We get that time and we can work the distance and the math. We get a dog on it. If Henderson came forward now and said -- here ya go, public. We've asked for your help, and now we're giving you the info so you can help us... would we criticize him?

I won't. Whatever it takes... let's find her.

If someone from Stephanie's family finally came forward, what would they say? "Hi y'all. I don't know where in the hello I've been, but I love Stephanie and want her found."

I'd forgive him. Whatever it takes... let's find her.
 
Sorry to report in that I checked with a very reliable source and found out that the FBI is NOT involved in this case. That blew my theory that she may have been in a witness protection program! I have all sorts of theories just like everyone here in hopes that Stephanie is still alive. Unfortunately, every day that goes by seems to bring more and more crazy theories to mind as to what could have happened to her. I know we can't name names but IMO I think there should be 4 POI's!! JMO
 
Lilibet said:
Your change looks fine, Neptune. I suppose the reporter could follow up and confirm all this on her own if I gave her the leads.

I'm just wary of going further with this. Both my husband and I were misquoted in local papers years ago in two separate stories. They weren't serious errors, but the reporters basically made stuff up. I don't trust that my privacy and anonymity would be respected. So I will stay behind the scenes.
Click to expand...

I would agree 100% with that. First, this a crime sleuthing community so the threads should be about crime + sleuthing. We do need more info from LE -- but I am not willing to feed the media tips. There is plenty for them to go on without us. Second, crime sleuthing = criminal sleuthing. Therefore, I'll stay back here.
 
Neptune said:
OK, here's a challenge to y'all... find any other missing person case investigation (Websleuths has numerous cases nationwide) that has not put a family member in front of a camera.

If local law enforcement has prevented the family from making an appeal to the public, or if the family does not feel an appeal is necessary -- let's just say, of all the active missing persons cases in the country, this case would be highly unusual.

So, is Stephanie's case extraordinarily different from all the others? If so, there had better be a surprising and exceptional outcome to all this -- a big "ah-ha, now we get it" moment. Or, is LE stuck at Square One for a reason and can only wish, having now realized the devoted interest in the woman from Ruch, they could go back two months? They can't go back -- but they can have a "do-over" -- release the information now. I want the timespan between the Jul 4 late to Jul 5 early start/stop engine reports. We get that time and we can work the distance and the math. We get a dog on it. If Henderson came forward now and said -- here ya go, public. We've asked for your help, and now we're giving you the info so you can help us... would we criticize him?

I won't. Whatever it takes... let's find her.

If someone from Stephanie's family finally came forward, what would they say? "Hi y'all. I don't know where in the hello I've been, but I love Stephanie and want her found."

I'd forgive him. Whatever it takes... let's find her.
Click to expand...

The thanks button just didn't quite cut it, Neptune.

The only "big aha now we get it moment" that I can imagine is something bigger than Stephanie. If LE is onto something in connection with her disappearance that is a security threat that could hurt a lot of people, yes, silence about Stephanie could be justified. If she were my daughter, I'd cooperate for the greater good. I've wondered for a long time if there is something big going on.

Other than that, as my Dad would have said, "Let's get the show on the road."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 128 more.
Total: 1,852 (members: 129, guests: 1,723)

Online statistics

Members online
129
Guests online
1,723
Total visitors
1,852
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,579
Messages
18,097,061
Members
230,887
Latest member
DeeDee214
Back
Top