charminglane
Sea Witch
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
- Messages
- 8,037
- Reaction score
- 34,168
:greetings:
We thank you for joining us in the quest to bring Shane home.
We thank you for joining us in the quest to bring Shane home.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Here is what I am finding interesting from those early interviews. Shane's uncle says the bouncer told the family that he saw Shane walk out of Kildare's and he wasn't stumbling. But, there is nothing indicating that the family even knew about the bouncer's sighting [that turned out to be false] early on., despite talking to the bouncer early on. I find that strange. Its weird that it took that a week to come to light and that the bouncer might not have said anything about it to the family, or anyone, early on.
Am I correct that the person who interacted with Shane regarding the DJ incident was the deemed relative? So if the bouncer's only interaction with Shane was that he watched him leave the bar, why would the bouncer even think it was Shane apologizing to him. Why would he think Shane would be apologizing to him, if he was simply standing at the door when Shane left and did not see the DJ incident.
Again,I do not know what to make of Kildares staff shady activity in this. Im sure a lot of it is liability and not wanting to be accused. But then I wonder about other stuff.
scaredtopost thinks outside the box.
Nice.
:greetings:
We thank you for joining us in the quest to bring Shane home.
Thank you Snicker for confirming. So the deemed relative interacted with Shane about the DJ thing,,,,, so why does the bouncer even remember Shane and his supposed good condition when leaving if there wasnt an incident. Why would he think Shane would apologize an hour later if he [the bouncer] would not even know about the DJ incident. Why does it not seem the family knew about the false sighting early on. Things about the bouncer isnt adding up imo, dont know if it means anything though.
Here's another version from another article at www.phillymag.com/news/2014/12/02/reward-shane-montgomerys-disappearance-rises-25000/ (BBM):
"Jim Townsend, the Director of Operations of Kildare’s, explained Monday that there was no altercation or friction surrounding Shane’s departure from the bar and emphasized that he was not acting drunk."
According to Townsend, Montgomery then met up with a relative, who is a Kildare's employee, who informed him it was closing time. He says it was 1:50 a.m. when the relative walked Shane to the front door where they were met with security who saw Shane out.
Townsend says, "Other than the front door staff, Shane did not have any interaction with any other management or security staff or cause a disruption as he left the restaurant. He was respectful and left the premises on his own."
It's anyone's guess where the truth lies in all of the versions that have been given.
And the 1:50 time again.......19 minutes before being seen on surveillance. :thinking:
How does the bar know it was 1:50 AM? Why not 2:05 AM, and then Shane goes straight to the lot? If the cameras were not working, how would they know what time Shane got thrown out? I almost think the 1:50 time was given to show they were not serving past 2 AM. It seems like half of this case is the bar covering up for liability reasons, but these facts materially affect the timeline of the disappearance. I take some of these supposed facts with a grain of salt, unless someone besides the bar verified the facts.
Thank you Snicker for confirming. So the deemed relative interacted with Shane about the DJ thing,,,,, so why does the bouncer even remember Shane and his supposed good condition when leaving if there wasnt an incident. Why would he think Shane would apologize an hour later if he [the bouncer] would not even know about the DJ incident. Why does it not seem the family knew about the false sighting early on. Things about the bouncer isnt adding up imo, dont know if it means anything though.
I am relatively new to following these missing persons cases. I wonder, if in some of these other cases, you have similar dynamics, where an establishment gets "all lawyered up" and says the right things legally and by the book, but those right things are not necessarily the best device for finding the missing person.
YOU can call me charm!
In my former life I was a madam in the old west.
Giddy up.
Is there a way to check if there have been any lawsuits filed against the Kildare's corporation? I'm thinking there might be some kind of past issue that the film flam arises from.
I would like to preface this by saying everyone thinks they are related in Roxborough it's like West Virginia. Shane's uncle on mom's side not the uncle on TV is married to deemed relative's aunt. He does not have social media accounts that I am aware of and has not been named in the media.What do we know about the distant relative/employee of Kildares that supposedly escorted Shane to the front door of Kildares? Has that person ever been named in the media? Do we know how they are supposedly related? Has this person been researched on social media?