Found Deceased PA - Dakota James, 23, Pittsburgh, 25 Jan 2017 #1

[ChuckMaureen]

Points to ponder:

Why no news media interviews with friends / co-workers who were with DJ the evening of January 25, 2017? It is SOP for news media to seek out individuals for interviews.

1) LE requested / instructed them to not give interviews.

...OR...

2) They chose on their own to not involve themselves with interviews.

I'm not reading anything in to #1 other than it is an "on-going investigation", etc. etc.

As for #2, what if the Wednesday evening 'happy hour / party night' was a going-away send-off? This does not seem likely, would friends / co-workers stand by silently as they witness DJ's mother's suffering? This would imply major issues at home but given DJ lives (since 2015?) in Pittsburgh (and not in Maryland / family home) this does not seem likely.


What do we have left, in no particular order:
=================================

1) social app / other means / meet-up gone wrong / abduction or river

2) street encounter / fight / dumpster or river

3) abduction / sex-trafficking

4) accidental entry in to the river

5) purposeful entry in to the river


'river' appears in most of these possibilities.

 

[Pittsburgh Sarah]

I think this was a happy hour that just continued. Sounds like he and the co-worker kept bar hopping after the happy hour had ended. Not something I would do, but maybe at 23 I would've done the same thing.

Personally more surprised that he get comfortable walking home to the north side at night. It's not the greatest of areas.

The fact that Pittsburgh seems to have so many instances like this (males in their early 20's who are drinking, end up alone, and then turn up in the river), is deeply upsetting to me. I'd hate to think there was something sinister in play here, but it's difficult not to jump to that.

 

[TMAN2014]

So, wouldn't Dakota have told his drinking friend, where he was going? I can't imagine you are out with someone, and then you just part ways, without any idea where the other person is going. Was this point mentioned, and I missed it?

OK, I reread it. So, he got tossed out of the bar, and away from his friend. So, wouldn't you text your friend if you got tossed?

 

[TMAN2014]

I keep rereading the first 2 pages of this thread. I guess I did not focus on some of the actual story, at first. Maybe I have a different idea of going out for beers with a friend or friends. This does not sound like much of a "friend," if Dakota was really drunk, kicked out of a bar, and yet there was little concern. I wish I knew the level of drunk that he was. You can be drunk, but coherent enough to get home. Been there, done that. If Dakota was stumbling and clearly intoxicated, the "friend" really has to go out of their way and try to get him home. And I understand being responsible for yourself, but common sense should come into play too.

 

[yankeegirl]

There are a number of our young people who go into rivers during the cold seasons. A couple of years back I did a case in Manayunk where a young man went missing after being caught on camera going across a pedestrian bridge over a canal to a parking lot. Spent a day searching the area. While intoxicated and despondent, he had passed through a hole in a security fence, walked across a grassy section of the island to the river embankment and gone in. He was found days later in a depression in the bottom of the river. He had not surfaced. This is not uncommon in cold water where the current has moved the body into a depression/hole or been caught up in debris. Of course this is only one scenario.

Yes, I clearly remember this case like it was yesterday and your helpful input. So sad.

 

[Vail]

I keep rereading the first 2 pages of this thread. I guess I did not focus on some of the actual story, at first. Maybe I have a different idea of going out for beers with a friend or friends. This does not sound like much of a "friend," if Dakota was really drunk, kicked out of a bar, and yet there was little concern. I wish I knew the level of drunk that he was. You can be drunk, but coherent enough to get home. Been there, done that. If Dakota was stumbling and clearly intoxicated, the "friend" really has to go out of their way and try to get him home. And I understand being responsible for yourself, but common sense should come into play too.

Yea it is definitely part of the mystery here - why didn't Dakota get into her Uber?

 

[pittsburgh1]

Okay, so I was curious and went after work to check out the camera scene. Here are the cameras I saw in the immediate area, along with my opinion of their scope and direction. There were some cameras that were in that "bubble" sphere and I wasn't sure which way they pointed; these I marked with a green question mark.

The parking garage area past Katz Plaza wasn't too badly lit but continuing down Scott Place and over down Barkers Place made me uneasy, even though it wasn't fully dark yet.

 

[pittsburgh1]

I was also very surprised at the lack of cameras on this apartment building.

Actually, (and again I'm assuming there's video cameras inside this building) if LE is unsure if DJ turned left or right and he wasn't spotted on any other camera, he could turned right and immediately been at a door. It's very odd that the camera at Warhol/7th street bridge didn't see him, unless they were turned off because of construction. Then again, that apartment building should have outside cameras and I haven't seen any...I've been looking daily.

 

[pittsburgh1]

Also - it hadn't crossed my mind until I went back this evening, but there is a large bike storage trailer & bike racks in the area behind Katz Plaza. Has there been anything released about whether or not he owned a bike? It is very doubtful that he would have biked downtown, parked near Sixth Street, taken the T to work, gone to happy hour, then biked home, but I would like to know for sure.

 

[Factbased]

modified (using selective spacing, for purpose of clarity) and bbm





re: #1: LE did not state, "DJ and co-worker did not go into Images". He stated, "...they were not there long as the bartender refused to serve them." He did not mean they weren't served any drinks, it means they weren't there long because the bartender (eventually) refused to serve them (more) drinks.

 

[Factbased]

I interpreted PPD comment stating images refused to serve them as meaning they weren't there long, maybe a few minutes tops. DJ's mother may have mispoken when stating PPD said DJ and coworker were not at Images. But I think the important fact here is that DJ's mother states she has a receipt showing when they were there and they were not denied service. PPD didn't say they were cut off. PPD stated DJ and coworker were denied service. There is a difference in being denied service and getting cut off.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Factbased]

Ok, we kind of know the time stamps on the cameras may not be completely accurate. That got me thinking about what DJ's mom said about "butt dialing" his father shortly before he was seen in Katz Plaza at 11:49. How do they know it was a butt dial? Did they answer the phone and speak to him or did they just hear random noise? Were they asleep? What if DJ sensed he was in trouble and called his dad, but whoever took him ended the call or smashed the phone?

I would think DJ's parents would be calling back if they answered the "butt dial" and no one was there or if they were asleep and called him back the next morning. Then if the phone was off for whatever reason and it kept going to voicemail, I'd think they'd be trying to reach DJ at work, etc., before being notified by police that he was missing.

I believe the "butt dial" was actually a "butt text". I saw that correction on Facebook. It said DJ's father got a garbled text from DJ at 11:45. The image is at 11:49. Now, it doesn't state when his father saw the text. Maybe the next morning?
I have "butt texted" before...actually act few times. It happens.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Factbased]

Has anyone with LE questioned this Uber driver about that night? He might be able to shed some light about any conversation he heard between the co-worker and DJ.

From my understanding PPD spoke to the Uber driver said he didn't notice anything unusual with that specific run.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Factbased]

Weird. Maybe it was changed to honor someone he was close to? My first thought was transgendered, but I have seen younger photos and he was always a guy. I know someone who changed their name for religious reasons. Maybe he really hated his middle name?

The chatter I heard was that he didn't like the middle name "Lynn" and he changed it to "Leo". Maybe after someone he knows?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[jamess]

As an experiment, I assumed for a minute that the LE timeline and statements are all true, and then tried to develop some possible scenarios that could fit around those facts. One possible outcome is the following:

- DJ and co-worker start off drinking as part of the happy hour crowd in the South Side, but the two of them keep going, working their way to a specific area of town.
- Their desire to keep drinking & migrating toward the theater district may have been motivated simply by "being 23 years old", and additionally wanting to work their way closer to DJ's home. But alternatively, the motivation may have been partly "killing time" until a specific planned event at a location closer to the theater district.
- The LE timeline has the co-worker calling an Uber at approximately 10:30, and getting into the Uber at 11:49. In this areas of Pittsburgh, you can't look 20 feet in either direction without seeing an Uber. So on the surface, this timeline sounds incorrect. However, the LE statement was likely written by lawyers with precisely chosen words; so perhaps there is a way for it to be correct. Uber has a "schedule for later" feature; which means the co-worker could have arranged the ride at 10:30, for a 15-minute pickup window between 11:45 and 12:00. This would mean the Uber actually was within 4 minutes of her expected time (fitting with expected wait times in the area). It would also fit a hypothesis that DJ and co-worker were planning something between approximately 10:30 and 11:30 in this general area.
- If the above hypothesis was true, and depending on what they were doing between 10:30, and 11:30, (and with whom) it might explain a few other things. Specifically, it may bring clarity to questions such as:
-- Why is there absolutely no detail from LE on what the two of them did in the "missing hour" (per their own timeline) between hailing Uber and getting into the Uber?
-- Is there someone DJ may have met up with (again) after his co-worker got into the Uber?
-- Why did the co-worker call LE so quickly the next morning when DJ didn't show up for work?

Lastly, of all the inconsistencies in this story, the last point (co-worker immediately calling LE) is the most telling. When two 20-somethings go out for a hard night of drinking, to the point of getting kicked out of bars and/or not recalling some details of the night, it would be most common to assume that a non-responsive friend was sleeping in, and their phone had died. The fact that the co-worker called LE so quickly clearly betrays that she knew something had happened.

You could conclude that she knew he was in danger because of texts/calls between her and DJ after they parted that night, and that LE are not disclosing this. However, sticking to the thought experiment that "LE statements are true", the other explanation may lie in the "missing hour". In this scenario, she didn't need a text or call; she just may have thought back to what they were doing (with whom) from 10:30-11:30, and then connected the dots that DJ may have gone back to that place/person again after she left, and this scared her.

Of course, if this hypothesis is true, then it would be logical to assume she has told LE everything she knows and they are pursuing it. It would raise some questions as to why they are searching the river so actively; however (a) as many have pointed out; even if a nefarious individual is responsible, it doesn't preclude that he ended up in the river, and/or (b) river searches may be used to throw another suspect off of the case, or (c) the family heard LE propose a theory that would be consistent with the hypothesis above, and they rejected it so fervently, that they decided to conduct river searches partially to quiet them.

 

[shandram19]

There are a number of our young people who go into rivers during the cold seasons. A couple of years back I did a case in Manayunk where a young man went missing after being caught on camera going across a pedestrian bridge over a canal to a parking lot. Spent a day searching the area. While intoxicated and despondent, he had passed through a hole in a security fence, walked across a grassy section of the island to the river embankment and gone in. He was found days later in a depression in the bottom of the river. He had not surfaced. This is not uncommon in cold water where the current has moved the body into a depression/hole or been caught up in debris. Of course this is only one scenario.

Tracker, are you talking about Shane Montgomery in this post?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[jamess]

- sorry I am new to this site, so I'm not sure if I should edit my previous post, or re-post this -

One last point in continuance of my "Assume LE statements are true" hypothesis:

The rebuttal from DJ's mother included this:
2. There is a surveillance camera at the wine and spirits that showed Dakota and coworker walking down Liberty Street after leaving Images which I believe was around the 11:30pm time. They were walking towards the T station. Proof again your timeline is off and misleading to the character of Dakota.

Think about this in context of the "missing hour" (explained in above post). DJ's mother knows that the publicly-released camera images place DJ at Katz Plaza around 11:46-11:49ish. This isn't disputed by anyone.

DJ's mother's statement clearly implies that DJ and co-worker were at Images until 11:30. LE statements imply they left Images around 10:30, and provide no detail of their wherabouts until the Uber pickup at ~11:49. Clearly there is a discrepancy of about an hour between LE and mother's beliefs of their timeline.

But why would this timeline discrepancy be "misleading to the character of Dakota?" This statement is potentially very telling.

Is it possible that DJ's mother's response fits into the hypothesis in my earlier post? Perhaps she was presented with a theory/explanation of what may have occurred during the "missing hour" and she refused to accept it, so is pushing back with alternative support for DJ being at Images for that hour?

Otherwise, why would the 1-hour discrepancy have anything to do with DJ's character?

 

[SomeoneElse333]

I believe the "butt dial" was actually a "butt text". I saw that correction on Facebook. It said DJ's father got a garbled text from DJ at 11:45. The image is at 11:49. Now, it doesn't state when his father saw the text. Maybe the next morning?
I have "butt texted" before...actually act few times. It happens.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

This is so chilling and heartbreaking. :-(

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

[psu2007]

I took DJ's mom talking about character meaning that LE doesn't know her son. That he's not the type of person to get so drunk that he gets kicked out of somewhere. That he wouldn't leave the female coworker to wait alone for the uber. Obviously, parent's like to think their child is a perfect angle. However, kids, even adult kids, try their best to fit that description when in the presence of their parents, but when away from them, then that's a different story. I'm not implying anything other than what others are saying...that despite how close any family thinks they are, they may not really no someone as well as close friends do.

Still, it's very odd LE would say 10:30 and not retract or correct that statement.

 

[SomeoneElse333]

Why did the co-worker call LE so quickly the next morning when DJ didn't show up for work?

The fact that the co-worker called LE so quickly clearly betrays that she knew something had happened.

You could conclude that she knew he was in danger because of texts/calls between her and DJ after they parted that night, and that LE are not disclosing this. However, sticking to the thought experiment that "LE statements are true", the other explanation may lie in the "missing hour". In this scenario, she didn't need a text or call; she just may have thought back to what they were doing (with whom) from 10:30-11:30, and then connected the dots that DJ may have gone back to that place/person again after she left, and this scared her.

Of course, if this hypothesis is true, then it would be logical to assume she has told LE everything she knows and they are pursuing it. It would raise some questions as to why they are searching the river so actively; however (a) as many have pointed out; even if a nefarious individual is responsible, it doesn't preclude that he ended up in the river, and/or (b) river searches may be used to throw another suspect off of the case, or (c) the family heard LE propose a theory that would be consistent with the hypothesis above, and they rejected it so fervently, that they decided to conduct river searches partially to quiet them.

These are great thoughts! I have been wondering almost from the beginning about unanswered questions related to the co-worker and their place of employment.

But this particular question did not occur to me. Why *did* they call so quickly?

Some people have speculated that they may have been out to celebrate, but really the first thing that occurred to me is that they may have been out to console somebody. Did they get bad news from school? Did their company have layoffs or did a particularly trying project come to an end? Was someone having relationship problems? Maybe that's the reason for bar hopping. Perhaps that coworker was trying to console Dakota or vice versa. Or if someone was having relationship problems, they could hang around, they bar hopped seeing it as an opportunity to break through with someone they were interested in romantically.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk