Found Deceased SC - Brittanee Drexel, 17, Myrtle Beach, 25 April 2009 - #8

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
If anything can be certain from what the media reported it would be that Brittanee was in trouble when she didn't answer JG's last text message at 9:16pm.
 
Debbie Miller said:
If anything can be certain from what the media reported it would be that Brittanee was in trouble when she didn't answer JG's last text message at 9:16pm.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

If the later times were correct with the DST coming into play - (within a few minutes or so of the times being correct - the time line flows a lot better.

8:55 enter BWR 9:13 leave BWR - texts with JG til 9:15/9:16

LE says BD goes missing within 7 minutes - would mean she possibly walked (or hung around BWR) for 2 to 3 minutes before being abducted/taken/picked up/willingly gets into vehicle

Surfside ping would be approx 9:30 +/- a couple minutes (depending upon traffic)

But none of that jives with what PB & JP (lawyer) have said regarding when BD was in PB 's room...
 
There's nothing new in any of the links being posted lately. Hopefully we get news soon! I'm hoping that tips came in as a result of the breaking news last week and that we see an arrest before the one year mark. Brittanee needs justice!


:Justice:
 
IMO if PB was scared enough to run straight into the hands of a lawyer, he was scared enough to be mixed up on the exact times anything occurred but maybe was grasping at straws to come up with some times and once he and his lawyer state those times, they stick by them.
 
MBLover said:
Exactly!

If the later times were correct with the DST coming into play - (within a few minutes or so of the times being correct - the time line flows a lot better.

8:55 enter BWR 9:13 leave BWR - texts with JG til 9:15/9:16

LE says BD goes missing within 7 minutes - would mean she possibly walked (or hung around BWR) for 2 to 3 minutes before being abducted/taken/picked up/willingly gets into vehicle

Surfside ping would be approx 9:30 +/- a couple minutes (depending upon traffic)

But none of that jives with what PB & JP (lawyer) have said regarding when BD was in PB 's room...
Click to expand...

I can't help but wonder if they really knew the time at all.

I would hope the police got the phone log for her phone to see who did make that call to Britt while in PB's hotel room. It may have been how what they know now is tied in because the caller really wasn't her friends it was xxxxx????
 
Strawberry Fields said:
IMO if PB was scared enough to run straight into the hands of a lawyer, he was scared enough to be mixed up on the exact times anything occurred but maybe was grasping at straws to come up with some times and once he and his lawyer state those times, they stick by them.
Click to expand...

True...LOL...but didn't they take into consideration that cell phones, cams and other things may tell a different story.
 
MBLover said:
True...LOL...but didn't they take into consideration that cell phones, cams and other things may tell a different story.
Click to expand...

They appear not to have taken a lot of things into consideration...speaking of consideration...none of those ROC kids appear to have consideration for anyone but themselves. LOL
 
mlatta said:
I hope this doesn't sound rude, but I have no idea as to which of my posts you were quoting... :waitasec: or what I was stating at the time.. please refresh me

On another note

I still have a gut feeling that the phone call about the shorts is BS. 1) It's a simple story, that is rather easy to stick to, even for several people.. 2) iirc, she had just left BH not long ago, walked to BW and was only there for 10-20 minutes?... I use "gut feeling" because other than those 2 reasons I listed, I have no other reason to disbelieve it, yet I still do.
Click to expand...

The theory I was referring to was your drug (running) theory on previous page. Only theory I saw you post recently.

She was only there 10-20 minutes because she got the phone call demanding she bring the shorts back. I don't understand why that's difficult to believe or why two groups of people from Rochester would coordinate such a preposterous made up story, coordinate a phone call, and instruct Brittanee to text her bf that she was returning to her hotel all to camaflauge whatever you all think Brittanee was actually doing rather than walking back to her hotel.

If you come back to your room, especially if you're a girl, to get dressed to go out and find out a roommate took the clothes you were going to wear what the heck do you think the girl is going to do? Of course she's going to ring up the roommate and tell her to return her clothes pronto. I would have a hard time believing anything otherwise, unless of course this multi-group conspiracy to mask the actions of someone none of them wanted around included an elaboration of Brittanee walking out with her roommates shorts on to justify the phone call, instructed text to her bf, and some secret mission during the pretense of walking back to her hotel.

The only thing driving all this as far as I can tell is an attempt to place her willingly in a vehicle with multiple strange men based on four POI's who police said didn't know her directly. Granted, there is a statement referring to knowing her whereabouts or something, but I would think that sitting in a vehicle with a bunch of men (while allegedly calmly texting to bf) would consitute knowing the men, so to speak.

I agree with others, Matt, you actions and FOIA request concerning the sunglasses were at the very least extremely opportune timing. Great work.

rd
 
""Let me clarify to you: These are not guys that just popped up last week," Lt. Neil Johnson, a Georgetown County Sheriff's Office spokesman, told AOL News. "We've been looking at these guys since about the first of the year, and we're not fixing to make an arrest."

This quote from AOL News' article leaves me unhopeless (I've turned that into a word).
 
LLLindsayy said:
""Let me clarify to you: These are not guys that just popped up last week," Lt. Neil Johnson, a Georgetown County Sheriff's Office spokesman, told AOL News. "We've been looking at these guys since about the first of the year, and we're not fixing to make an arrest."

This quote from AOL News' article leaves me unhopeless (I've turned that into a word).
Click to expand...


OMG I thought the same freakin thing! WTF is going on? Are LE making these contradictory statements or is this another example of bad reporting? ("Fixing????? sorry but that made me giggle).
 
rd_jfc said:
The theory I was referring to was your drug (running) theory on previous page. Only theory I saw you post recently.

She was only there 10-20 minutes because she got the phone call demanding she bring the shorts back. I don't understand why that's difficult to believe or why two groups of people from Rochester would coordinate such a preposterous made up story, coordinate a phone call, and instruct Brittanee to text her bf that she was returning to her hotel all to camaflauge whatever you all think Brittanee was actually doing rather than walking back to her hotel.

If you come back to your room, especially if you're a girl, to get dressed to go out and find out a roommate took the clothes you were going to wear what the heck do you think the girl is going to do? Of course she's going to ring up the roommate and tell her to return her clothes pronto. I would have a hard time believing anything otherwise, unless of course this multi-group conspiracy to mask the actions of someone none of them wanted around included an elaboration of Brittanee walking out with her roommates shorts on to justify the phone call, instructed text to her bf, and some secret mission during the pretense of walking back to her hotel.

The only thing driving all this as far as I can tell is an attempt to place her willingly in a vehicle with multiple strange men based on four POI's who police said didn't know her directly. Granted, there is a statement referring to knowing her whereabouts or something, but I would think that sitting in a vehicle with a bunch of men (while allegedly calmly texting to bf) would consitute knowing the men, so to speak.

I agree with others, Matt, you actions and FOIA request concerning the sunglasses were at the very least extremely opportune timing. Great work.

rd
Click to expand...


Specifically referring to the shorts, I feel that the theories could go one way or the other. The phone call could have simply been about the shorts, or it may have been about something else. I wish there was evidence presented thus far to convince me one way or the other, but there's not. One thing I can say though...

Way back in the beginning when the female friends were adding pictures of the trip to their FB pages, more than one photo was shown where all of the girls were wearing the same black shorts. It was questioned why JO would want "her" shorts back when they all had the same ones.

OK, that's all for now I suppose.
 
RocNYchick said:
OMG I thought the same freakin thing! WTF is going on? Are LE making these contradictory statements or is this another example of bad reporting? ("Fixing????? sorry but that made me giggle).
Click to expand...


It's probably bad reporting. Did LE do an actual news conference on this? I think I saw video of them speaking on Jane Velez Mitchell the other night. It seems to me that they said the few statements that we heard and that all media reports are stemming from that video and being translated however the journalist understands the facts to have been said.

As for all the "quotes"... if they are in fact actual, verbatim quotes, then LE seems to be contradicting themselves left and right. I'm betting that the quotes have been paraphrased, though, and that's why we're getting conflicting reports.
 
rd_jfc said:
The theory I was referring to was your drug (running) theory on previous page. Only theory I saw you post recently.

She was only there 10-20 minutes because she got the phone call demanding she bring the shorts back. I don't understand why that's difficult to believe or why two groups of people from Rochester would coordinate such a preposterous made up story, coordinate a phone call, and instruct Brittanee to text her bf that she was returning to her hotel all to camaflauge whatever you all think Brittanee was actually doing rather than walking back to her hotel.

If you come back to your room, especially if you're a girl, to get dressed to go out and find out a roommate took the clothes you were going to wear what the heck do you think the girl is going to do? Of course she's going to ring up the roommate and tell her to return her clothes pronto. I would have a hard time believing anything otherwise, unless of course this multi-group conspiracy to mask the actions of someone none of them wanted around included an elaboration of Brittanee walking out with her roommates shorts on to justify the phone call, instructed text to her bf, and some secret mission during the pretense of walking back to her hotel.

The only thing driving all this as far as I can tell is an attempt to place her willingly in a vehicle with multiple strange men based on four POI's who police said didn't know her directly. Granted, there is a statement referring to knowing her whereabouts or something, but I would think that sitting in a vehicle with a bunch of men (while allegedly calmly texting to bf) would consitute knowing the men, so to speak.

I agree with others, Matt, you actions and FOIA request concerning the sunglasses were at the very least extremely opportune timing. Great work.

rd
Click to expand...


rd, I could totally see them coordinating efforts. Teenage girls can be nasty, nasty, nasty. Esp when there are boys involved. She was the young chick, maybe getting too much attention, or being a drag to them. I could totally see them setting up something, possibly thinking it was "innocent" just to piss BD off or to see her running back and forth just for the sake of it. Not to mention the nasty crap they were saying on FB when they got back. And PB not being a "babysitter" ? I mean everything we've seen, these are NOT nice kids, so I could totally see it.
 
RocNYchick said:
OMG I thought the same freakin thing! WTF is going on? Are LE making these contradictory statements or is this another example of bad reporting? ("Fixing????? sorry but that made me giggle).
Click to expand...

Me too Roc! I am from the south and use this phrase sometimes but not with the word 'not' preceding the 'fixing to'. Like, "I'm 'fixing to' run to the store." Meaning, "I'm about to run to the store." I also wonder why we use the word 'run' instead of 'drive'. It's like a foreign language to many. Gotta love our Southern slang, LOL!

Back on topic. Maybe LE stated this for fear the suspects would be nervous and flee the area.

MOO.

wm
 
LLLindsayy said:
""Let me clarify to you: These are not guys that just popped up last week," Lt. Neil Johnson, a Georgetown County Sheriff's Office spokesman, told AOL News. "We've been looking at these guys since about the first of the year, and we're not fixing to make an arrest."

This quote from AOL News' article leaves me unhopeless (I've turned that into a word).
Click to expand...

Me too :( IMO, LE released the info on having POI's to turn up the heat. Hopefully it works! Or perhaps, LE made the statement "we're not fixing to make an arrest" so some would let their guard down and slip up somehow?

It's not uncommon for LE to make misleading statements to the media. They use this as a tool in their investigations. For example, I've seen many cases over the years where LE says they have no POI, and then poof a few days later an arrest is made.

I guess my point is, I'm not ready to give up on this angle yet. There's a method to this madness, just wish we could make sense of it now!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 187 more.
Total: 2,030 (members: 188, guests: 1,842)

Online statistics

Members online
188
Guests online
1,842
Total visitors
2,030
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,003
Messages
18,197,008
Members
233,702
Latest member
mascaraguns
Back
Top