MP states on LISK podcast that he called JB on one phone and then called back and left a msg on JB’s other phone? What? So before SG went inside she gave MP TWO contact phone numbers for JB?
Possible Victim: Shannan Gilbert #2
- Thread starter shadowraiths
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
- Status
I listened to the same episode on that, but didn’t see that. Good spot. He’d only have had 2xnumbers if he was an associate. I also noticed in that episode that AD claiming he was her phoning on the 1/2 and it was going to voicemail, then became active again, then was switched off. If true that would mean Shannan’s phone was taken from her. If she’d dropped it fleeing it would just have died forever. I can find her phone records but they only go up to the 9/11 call. Has it been deliberately limited to that by the police? Do missed calls to a live phone show on the records.
Also, and this is pure speculation on my part. SG went out on an errand with Brewster inside Oak Beach, potentially for drugs from CPH.
Then when she returned, she called CVS. I know PAK says that she wanted certain items and others have speculated that she wanted to get a prescription.
What if that’s looking at it the wrong way now. If SG was administered drugs by CPH, then is it possible she became concerned enough about what he’d administered to call CVS and ask what it was he’d given her? If she’d seen a brand name on a vial or similar. If CVS had said ‘No that’s a very strong anaesthetic and will disable anyone taking it’. Then Shannan might have put 2+2 together.
Just speculation, but y’know.
Still trying to wade through the 90+ pages of MP...
Then when she returned, she called CVS. I know PAK says that she wanted certain items and others have speculated that she wanted to get a prescription.
What if that’s looking at it the wrong way now. If SG was administered drugs by CPH, then is it possible she became concerned enough about what he’d administered to call CVS and ask what it was he’d given her? If she’d seen a brand name on a vial or similar. If CVS had said ‘No that’s a very strong anaesthetic and will disable anyone taking it’. Then Shannan might have put 2+2 together.
Just speculation, but y’know.
Still trying to wade through the 90+ pages of MP...
Estate of Gilbert v. Hackett, 2020 [court records]
I thought some might find this interesting. This was the court's decision to have Suffolk County release Shannan's 911 call. I've slightly edited it to make it more readable, and removed a lot of technical legal phrasing (such as *Anderson v State of New York*, 134 AD3d 1061, 1062-1063).
See the entire record [here](Estate of Gilbert v. Hackett, 2020 NY Slip Op 2670 – CourtListener.com).
\------------
Decided on May 6, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
**Estate of Shannan Gilbert, etc., et al., respondents,**
v
**Charles Peter Hackett, etc., defendant; Suffolk County Police Department, nonparty-appellant.**
DECISION & ORDER
In an action \[...\] to recover damages for personal injuries, nonparty Suffolk County Police Department (SCPD) appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County. The order \[...\] denied the motions of nonparty SCPD to quash certain subpoenas \[...\] and granted those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In this action, the representatives of the estates of Shannan Gilbert and of her mother, Mari Gilbert, seek to recover damages from the defendant Charles Peter Hackett in connection with Shannan's disappearance and death. As a result of prior rulings of the Supreme Court, the causes of action that remained at the time the order appealed from was decided were to recover damages for Shannan's pain and suffering up to the time of her death and for emotional distress and related harms suffered by Mari. The plaintiffs served nonparty SCPD with two court-ordered subpoenas duces tecum.
* The first subpoena sought the production of the recording, and any transcripts and analyses, of a 911 emergency call received and recorded by the New York State Police and turned over to the SCPD, that Shannan made on the night of her disappearance on May 1, 2010.
* The second subpoena sought the production of any and all recordings of any and all 911 calls made on or about May 1 through 3, 2010, regarding Shannan, as well as any transcripts and analyses of those calls.
The SCPD made two motions to quash the subpoenas, contending \[...\] that the subpoenas sought production of records that were barred from production under the Public Officers Law. The plaintiffs cross-moved \[...\] to compel compliance with the two subpoenas. The Supreme Court denied the SCPD's motions to quash and granted those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions. The SCPD appeals.
"The discovery provisions of CPLR article 31 operate independently of the Freedom of Information Law, and a litigant's entitlement to any particular evidentiary item under article 31 is not affected by the disclosability of that item under FOIL".
Disclosure in civil actions is generally governed by CPLR 3101(a), which provides that "\[t\]here shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action." The courts possess wide discretion to decide whether information sought is "material and necessary" to the prosecution or defense of an action. The words "material and necessary" are "to be interpreted liberally to require disclosure, upon request, of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity. The test is one of usefulness and reason". The right to disclosure, although broad, is not unlimited and "competing interests must always be balanced; the need for discovery must be weighed against any special burden to be borne by the opposing party." "\[T\]he court may . . . make a protective order denying, limiting, conditioning or regulating the use of any disclosure device. Such order shall be designed to prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage, or other prejudice to any person or the courts."
**We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the SCPD's conclusory assertions that disclosure of the 911 recordings would interfere with an ongoing homicide investigation more than eight years after Shannan's death did not outweigh the plaintiffs' interest in disclosure of material which was relevant to the plaintiffs' action.** Thus, under the circumstances presented, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the SCPD's motions to quash and to grant those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions.
I thought some might find this interesting. This was the court's decision to have Suffolk County release Shannan's 911 call. I've slightly edited it to make it more readable, and removed a lot of technical legal phrasing (such as *Anderson v State of New York*, 134 AD3d 1061, 1062-1063).
See the entire record [here](Estate of Gilbert v. Hackett, 2020 NY Slip Op 2670 – CourtListener.com).
\------------
Decided on May 6, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
**Estate of Shannan Gilbert, etc., et al., respondents,**
v
**Charles Peter Hackett, etc., defendant; Suffolk County Police Department, nonparty-appellant.**
DECISION & ORDER
In an action \[...\] to recover damages for personal injuries, nonparty Suffolk County Police Department (SCPD) appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County. The order \[...\] denied the motions of nonparty SCPD to quash certain subpoenas \[...\] and granted those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In this action, the representatives of the estates of Shannan Gilbert and of her mother, Mari Gilbert, seek to recover damages from the defendant Charles Peter Hackett in connection with Shannan's disappearance and death. As a result of prior rulings of the Supreme Court, the causes of action that remained at the time the order appealed from was decided were to recover damages for Shannan's pain and suffering up to the time of her death and for emotional distress and related harms suffered by Mari. The plaintiffs served nonparty SCPD with two court-ordered subpoenas duces tecum.
* The first subpoena sought the production of the recording, and any transcripts and analyses, of a 911 emergency call received and recorded by the New York State Police and turned over to the SCPD, that Shannan made on the night of her disappearance on May 1, 2010.
* The second subpoena sought the production of any and all recordings of any and all 911 calls made on or about May 1 through 3, 2010, regarding Shannan, as well as any transcripts and analyses of those calls.
The SCPD made two motions to quash the subpoenas, contending \[...\] that the subpoenas sought production of records that were barred from production under the Public Officers Law. The plaintiffs cross-moved \[...\] to compel compliance with the two subpoenas. The Supreme Court denied the SCPD's motions to quash and granted those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions. The SCPD appeals.
"The discovery provisions of CPLR article 31 operate independently of the Freedom of Information Law, and a litigant's entitlement to any particular evidentiary item under article 31 is not affected by the disclosability of that item under FOIL".
Disclosure in civil actions is generally governed by CPLR 3101(a), which provides that "\[t\]here shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action." The courts possess wide discretion to decide whether information sought is "material and necessary" to the prosecution or defense of an action. The words "material and necessary" are "to be interpreted liberally to require disclosure, upon request, of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity. The test is one of usefulness and reason". The right to disclosure, although broad, is not unlimited and "competing interests must always be balanced; the need for discovery must be weighed against any special burden to be borne by the opposing party." "\[T\]he court may . . . make a protective order denying, limiting, conditioning or regulating the use of any disclosure device. Such order shall be designed to prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage, or other prejudice to any person or the courts."
**We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the SCPD's conclusory assertions that disclosure of the 911 recordings would interfere with an ongoing homicide investigation more than eight years after Shannan's death did not outweigh the plaintiffs' interest in disclosure of material which was relevant to the plaintiffs' action.** Thus, under the circumstances presented, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the SCPD's motions to quash and to grant those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to enforce the subpoenas subject to stated restrictions.
eagleyeseymour
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2020
- Messages
- 166
- Reaction score
- 513
It certainly serves those involved in the crime. One can be certain the perpetrator(s) would prefer to be free than incarcerated for the remainder of their life.
I’m just reading a book called ‘The Last Stone’. It’s about the murder of two little girls from a family called Lyons. One of the suspects in the case (haven’t finished reading it yet) held sex parties with groups of men, raping usually underage victims. And that culminated in murder.
Just thought it was interesting because I’ve seen a lot of people talk about Occam’s razor on this case, but frequently it doesn’t work.
It also makes me think that if groups of men were having rape parties where the Lyon’s were, it makes me think it could have been happening in Long Island too.
Just thought it was interesting because I’ve seen a lot of people talk about Occam’s razor on this case, but frequently it doesn’t work.
It also makes me think that if groups of men were having rape parties where the Lyon’s were, it makes me think it could have been happening in Long Island too.
I really think she did call CVS for drug info!!! She certainly didn’t call to pickup a prescription while doing a trick.
MP inconsistencies...
1. How long SG was inside home before leaving with JB.
2. How long SG and JB were gone to the store.
3. said JB called him to remove SG, later said JB came outside to his car and asked him to get SG
4. said he did everything he could looking for SG, that night, said in Lisk Podcast he went to neighbors homes (plural) ...he only went to Colleti’s, didn’t call AD to see if SG was home...AD called her
5. Leaves area on May 1st @ 5 am after not finding Shannon. Returns with AD on May 3rd at midnight to speak with JB through the gate. Comes back again (Date/time unk) with AD and speaks with the dr through the gate
Questions
How long was CVS call for Shannon? What time did she make call?
Did MP get money from rich JB or Dr to be quiet for drugging her?
Can someone plz post phone log for SG? MP? Dr H? JB?
also, MP said in Lisk Podcast ...“.Shannon always wanted to be famous, now she is famous” Seriously?!?!
MP said that SG did drugs with client day before, insinuates SG and MB went to buy drugs ...”they didn’t have any bags or anything from CVS, they came back with something small.”Lisk podcast
He is setting the stage that SG was a drug addict, but no one is asking him in the interview if she was a drug user...he just keeps talking about it
Because SG was drugged and somehow MP, JB and PH are responsible
I really think she did call CVS for drug info!!! She certainly didn’t call to pickup a prescription while doing a trick.
MP inconsistencies...
1. How long SG was inside home before leaving with JB.
2. How long SG and JB were gone to the store.
3. said JB called him to remove SG, later said JB came outside to his car and asked him to get SG
4. said he did everything he could looking for SG, that night, said in Lisk Podcast he went to neighbors homes (plural) ...he only went to Colleti’s, didn’t call AD to see if SG was home...AD called her
5. Leaves area on May 1st @ 5 am after not finding Shannon. Returns with AD on May 3rd at midnight to speak with JB through the gate. Comes back again (Date/time unk) with AD and speaks with the dr through the gate
Questions
How long was CVS call for Shannon? What time did she make call?
Did MP get money from rich JB or Dr to be quiet for drugging her?
Can someone plz post phone log for SG? MP? Dr H? JB?
also, MP said in Lisk Podcast ...“.Shannon always wanted to be famous, now she is famous” Seriously?!?!
MP said that SG did drugs with client day before, insinuates SG and JB went to buy drugs ...”they didn’t have any bags or anything from CVS, they came back with something small.”Lisk podcast
He is setting the stage that SG was a drug addict, but no one is asking him in the interview if she was a drug user...he just keeps talking about it
Because SG was drugged and somehow MP, JB and PH are responsible
Last edited:
I think it is safe to say, JB, MP and SG were recreational drug users. One reason to go to a CVS, is if you have a prescription for drugs that can be used recreationally. Of course the SCPD in the course of their investigation could ascertain what prescription were purchased, and who the prescribing doctor was.
The fact you point out that MP is very inconsistent in his statements, makes one wonder why the SCPD never tried to seek the truth.
The phone logs would require a court order for a warrant. The SCPD would have to ask for those warrants.
In my opinion, the SCPD never wanted investigate this case.
eagleyeseymour
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2020
- Messages
- 166
- Reaction score
- 513
It certainly serves those involved in the crime. One can be certain the perpetrator(s) would prefer to be free than incarcerated for the remainder of their life.
I'm not sure how long phone records are kept by cell providers but I'd imagine 10 years is not too long for law enforcement to retroactively scrutinize the records of the main POI's since they apparently do have the #'s these folks used circa 2010.
Movement, Geographic locations, People they contacted can connect dots that I feel have probably not been connected to date, the SCPD adopted a lasseiz fare approach to this case following the discovery of the bodies. Of course, they could be with holding pertinent info , it is my belief that they left many stones unturned.
Where was Pak on May 2nd? It gives him a full day to wash his hands of this.
eagleyeseymour
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2020
- Messages
- 166
- Reaction score
- 513
It's a coincidence I just made a stone analogy. SCPD is nowhere near the last stone, they need to start turning over the first few. JB, MP and CPH were all ruled out so quickly as if it was their job to cross these characters off their list.
Being an avid true crime fan and having watched countless seasons of FBI Files , Forensic Files, etc. one thing that amazed me is how many times an initial suspicious character was ruled out and eventually , with fresh eyes on the case many years later, that individual is linked to the crime and apprehended. I'm hoping Hart is compelled to allocate adequate resources into this case and do what she can to ensure that those assigned to it are beacons of integrity, not apathy.
I just want to know who the 48 yr old drifter was in JB’s house. Why has this been such a secret? Why did MP say he didn’t see anyone else in the house? Was there another car in the driveway, or did the drifter ride a bike?
eagleyeseymour
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2020
- Messages
- 166
- Reaction score
- 513
this is the same Paul Adams who was running with the NYPD Vice Detective, Rafael Astacio and had a burglary ring. Astacio resided in Copiague, what is interesting about Copiague is look at it on a map, it is directly North of the dumping ground, if there was bridge connecting the barrier Islands to Long Island proper, it'd be nearly a straight shot. Additionally, Copiague is very close to Massapequa, which is where some of the killers calls ping'd. That's all concerning enough, but then you think about the fact this guy was a VICE cop. Hmm.... Accomplices of NYPD detective, Rafael Astacio, accused of burglary have criminal histories
Other points to consider:
- The LISK caller at one point did say he was NYPD
- The caller told Maureen's friend Sarah she was at a "whorehouse in Queens"
- Astacio's co-defendants Alcoa & Brown are Queens Natives
- Astacio once resided in Queens himself
Brewer says in Lost Girls on page 350
" Dude there's something that you don't know, something really big. I do have some big chits on that, but I've got to hold them back. You want to know the truth, I mean, honestly, everybody would say the same thing I was saying, even if they were guilty. But there's a lot out there I know, I don't want to say this because a lot of them are my friends, but at the end of this, the police are going to have a lot of pie on their face"
Now, I don't want to make this into a Brewer thread, but it is relevant to Shannan and connecting the dots about who was there that night and what relationships existed. So you have Brewer flat out telling Kolker that he has information he is withholding because he doesn't want to incriminate "his friends". His "friends" are more important than justice for multiple dead women that were dumped a stones throw from his home. This statement from Brewer would substantiate the claims that these guys may have been at his home on 4/30. The only reason I've taken these claims with a grain of salt is because the sole source of this is MysteryMom7, a blogger whom reportedly got the list from a pizza delivery man (Michael D.)
As far as "the Drifter", there is a recording with Scalise talking to Mystery Mom 7 on the internet, if you look around you'll find it. In the audio clip Scalise says the drifter IS Paul Adams. Now in "Confessions of the Oak Beach Drifter" , the author "W" aka "Vito Safarti" tells a tale of being involved in burglaries, drugs, etc. This is very consistent with Paul Adams criminal history. Their ages also line up.... Why does "W" paint such a dark portrait of Brewer. Brewer supposedly told the cops that "W' was present that night, it's two scumbags saying "You Did It!", "No, You Did It!".
I'd find it hard to believe that more viable suspects exist outside this pool of upstanding gentlemen. Astacio, in particular, having worked Vice would have the street smarts and coercion skills to manipulate sex workers, he had an intimate working knowledge of their lifestyle and probably interviewed enough of them that he knows what makes them tick. Since Barthelemy and Barnes disappeared from NYC limits, it leads me to believe that whomever picked them up from their respective locations (BX & MidTown) was likely in the city already and did not drive out from Eastern Suffolk to pick them up. Now, who would be in the city already? Perhaps an officer from the NYPD.
This would explain why Shannan did not know who to trust, I believe she may have been aware of law enforcement present in Oak Beach that night. Part of me feels that if this burglary ring wanted to get some reassurance, they'd likely have to have someone in Suffolk in their pocket. They were sophisticated, but they also would have had an advantage with an insider in Suffolk backing them. Just a theory, but @hawkshaw has made some very compelling posts regarding Burke's ties to burglary. It is well known by people in the know that he was involved to some degree, dating back to his adolescence.
Without Shannan, we may have never even come to know "LISK" as it was her instinct/intuition (not delusions) that lead to her disappearance, subsequent search of the area and discovery of the remains along the Parkway. SCPD did not do a thorough investigation and IF there were dirty NYPD guys on Oak Beach that night who were , to some degree, in cahoots with SCPD it explains why this cover up would be so big. Think of how brazen the nature of those burglaries were, most of which took place on Long Island. This crew has many ties to the South Shore and if the claims we are discussing are true, those ties go right to 8 The Fairway, Oak Beach NY where Shannan ran for her life out of. Brewer alluded to it in his quote to Kolker. They've been prosecuted for the Burglaries, now, if they were brazen enough to do that, sounds like Suffolk was a playground for these corrupt NYPD guys, clearly emboldened and feeling like they can literally get away with murder.
The shadiest part of this whole investigation is the sense of urgency the SCPD had to eliminate Brewer, Pak and Hackett as POI's. Once they were eliminated, time took it's course and they used that time to their advantage. Brewer left, Hackett left, Pak is likely involved in something nefarious right NOW.
Chris Loeb uses Trumps "drain the swamp' idiom in his YouTube rants and I must agree with him. The irony of this is the actual swamp where Shannan was found. This case has much murky water that is tough for us to see through, but the Feds, with their resources should be looking at all of these people, their movement and communications dating back 10-15 years.
Last edited:
According to Robert Kolker's "Lost Grils", Shannon and JB left for an errand about twenty minutes after she and her driver Michael arrived JB's home, I don't think she told Michael that they went to CVS, because after she and JB back, she called and asked Michael to "go to a pharmacy" to buy some baby oil, K-Y Jelly and playing cards, so I figured she would not ask Michael to buy these stuffs had she just back from a CVS, Michael guessed they went out to buy drugs. And CVS was far away, according to the book, all the way across Great South Bay
After that Shannon and JB stayed in his house until the third hour of their "date, that was about 5 am. After that both Michael and JB's account to what happened next was basically same. Michael did not get any money from this "date" , according to him, he was furious to the drama caused by Shannon at that time, this I personally think is creditable, Michael and JB did not know each other, and many of their account could also be verified by the many residents who witnessed Shannon got out of JB's home alive and ran into the darkness.
What happened in the house can’t be verified by anyone but JB and MP and possibly the tapes give some indication of events. The neighbours can say she was running and screaming. They can’t say where or with who she was after they saw her or how she died.
MP and JB’s stories tallying (to an extent, MP often contradicted himself as well as Brewer) doesn’t mean it’s true. It just means they had their stories straight.
What I mean is that, based on the account of MP, JB and other residents, we ought to agree that Shannon was physically unhurt when she ran out of JB's house. Most possible explanation for what happened was that Shanon had a psychosis episode, she was bipolar, and most likely she was consuming drug or alcohol or both that night, then JB may well say or do something to trigger her illness. we know JB DID NOT physically harm her, and when JB saw Shannon flipped out, he just wanted her to leave. this part was confirmed by Michael's account, Whatever JB said or did to cause this episode
Cocaine psychosis doesn’t manifest like that. It’s slow burning, not sudden onset. Plus she was an experienced drug user which makes it unlikely drug induced psychosis would occur anyway.
Sometimes psychosis occurs with Bipolar, but again, that’s a slow burn thing, it happens during high and low bipolar episodes and there’s no evidence that Shannan was experiencing either of those before her death. The accounts from her boyfriend and family certainly don’t sound like a person having a Bipolar episode and definitely not a person with having an episode plus psychosis. Psychosis with bipolar does not manifest in a sudden break with reality as you’re suggesting Shannan did. Bipolar psychosis is much more likely to be linked to manic episodes and manifest as grandiose delusions (esp. with cocaine in the mix) rather than paranoia. It’s far, far more likely she had a genuine reason to be scared.
We don’t actually know JB didn’t harm her. We know when she left his house she was physically unharmed. I think it’s unlikely he harmed her, but it can’t be definitively ruled out.
Again, we don’t know for certain that the account of Shannan flipping out and JB wanting her to leave is true. MP ‘confirming’ the story is absolutely meaningless. MP has contradicted his own account of the night multiple times. Two people with matching stories means nothing. You realise that people who commit crimes in pairs or groups usually get their stories straight with each other so that they don’t expose themselves with conflicting stories?
You’re putting far too much trust into JB & MP. One was a drinker and drug abuser who regularly used hookers, the other was a man who made a living from prostitution and trafficking. It’s not like they’re known as being trustworthy and of good character, is it?
We don't know Shannon's mental state when she went to that date, so why you so sure about it would not manifest like that ?
JB may say something or do something to trigger this episode, what was that we do not know
I don't trust either JB or MP, but these two men were strangers to each other, and I don't think they were some kind of on the spot suddenly decided to be crime partner, and made up a story ? Come on !
And if you have read "Lost girls", then you would have known MP was not Shannon's pimp, he was a driver/security, and he was not a sex trafficker
- Status