Shannan Gilbert Found, death declared an accident. What do you think?

[Peter Brendt]

1.The ONLY information we can rely on is: SG was a prostitute working from a website. 2. She had a date the night she disappeared. 3. 10 other bodies have since been found in the same area. 4. 4 of those bodies were of prostitutes that worked from websites.
5. SG is dead after turning a trick in the same area.

Which is a weak connection if one at all. That reminds me of the Kathy Devine case or the Jill Barcomb Case. In both cases, LE linked the cases due to vicinity and similarity of the victims to known active SKs. Devine was linked for 20 something years to Bundy, till DNA showed, it was Cosden. Barcombe was linked to the Hillside Stranglers, but in fact, it later showed, she was one of Alcala's victims. So, two good examples, why not to trust those simplified "links".

WHY are you folks trying to put square pegs into round holes? The case has to be worked as a homicide until such time the evidence leads you in another direction.

Work it as a homicide as long as you want. Without any evidence for homicide, it will grow cold. The average career time of SKs grew to over 17 years since LE started to follow the rules of secrecy and simplified logic. So, sorry, I won't follow that road. Damn, in 15 years more, I'm almost old enough to retire. Oh ... wait, I'm a writer, we die at the keyboard ...

The M.E. can not determine the cause of death. The ME couldn't make a determination of death in another prostitute death.

Well, in the other four cases, they said, they can't talk about the details. Significant difference!

A man was convicted of stranguling the woman and said she just died while in the car. She was buried for a month and a half. He went to trial and was convicted of murder. The ME 'works well' with the DA and PD. In this case there was no evidence of stangulation. The suspect believed she died from a drug overdose or some other related cause due to drugs. How this guy got convicted of murder without a cause of death is still a mystery to me.

And, because you started it, another case of ME work. When one of Rifkin's victims was found, the ME ruled her as drug courier who died from an OD caused by a ripped plastic bag full of cocaine in her stomach. Without drug screening and without a bag in her stomach. So yeah, "undetermined" sounds under those circumstances at least somewhat honest.

Some of you folks suffer from thinking too much.

Funny, that was what retired LE vets told me in the last few cases ... of course before the guys were caught by accident and the profiles proved accurate. Thanks for reminding me to call those guys, they owe me still some beers.

The false rumor of the nursery owner being the killer was put out there by somebody. Who do you think it came from, the Easter Bunny?

Since the rumpor started in the internet, the Easter Biunny would be only a suspect if said bunny is tech savvy, uses multiple identities in the web and is familiar with the technique of sockpuppetting. As in Magnotta-style for example.

The papers said the police resumed their search for SG because the police had a 'tip.' Where could the tip have come from if someone didn't have a good idea where SG was?

It was calculable where she was, at least to narrow it down to a reasonable area. So the tip could have come from anyone either knowing the area or familiar with a little math. I for example admit to have predicted this finding area, long before she was actually found, in mails to SCPD and also here on WS. So what? Could be thousands, who did a little logic instead of trying to put square pegs in round holes.

Peter

 

[Peter Brendt]

We are supposed to be helping here, not posturing for power on a website.

Then why you tried in the first place?

 

[BKS]

this is why I hardly post any more...

Law enforcement isn't giving us anything & egos are surfacing on the board that really don't add anything to the discussion.

None of us are any better at sleuthing than the other.

I know what you mean. It's pretty obvious what's going on here. That's why that ignore button is so helpful!

 

[Samantha Spade]

Mr. B said, "How would I know whether my IQ is higher than yours if I don't know yours? And then, IQ isn't everything. IQ doesn't really determine what you fo, only how effective you do it after you decided to do anything at all. Rifkin has an IQ of 128 and still, he was in many aspects unable to live. So, the mere IQ in itself isn't everything,, it is what you do with it. But admittedly, my IQ is high enough to afford to dismiss IQ as measure of all things."

I was being facetious. Your posts come across (to at least me anyway) as ego driven and extremely arrogant, passive aggressive, and spewing with sarcastic venom. You obviously have a small keyboard complex. But hey, if it makes you feel better about yourself to insult others by addressing them in a demeaning manner, then continue on.
By your posts, I would sense your time here is more about stroking your own ego than helping to catch a killer and support the families who are suffering.

 

[Just K]

I will just say, logic goes both ways.

No matter how many times I am knocked and no matter how many paragraphs, of mine, are quoted and chopped to bits, I will keep my reactions to myself.

 

[Seaslug44]

The proof that SG lived a life full of physical and emotional abuse that started when she was a child and continued until her adulthood along with the proof that she used marijuana, cocaine & ectasy along with the proof that she would drink until intoxicated along with the proof that she had several abortions and also had lost weight dramatically just prior to her disapperance come directly from the two closest people in her life; her SISTER and her BOYFRIEND (not PIMP, but her real, actual BOYFRIEND since 2008 as confirmed by her family that SG LIVED WITH HIM).

SOURCE IS HERE

In a long interview with the paper, Gilbert’s boyfriend tells of a stormy relationship marked by her drug use, abortions and a fight in which he admits breaking her jaw...

The talk shouldn’t be about what Gilbert did or didn’t do for a living, advocates and family say. Yes, she was troubled, and yes, she made bad decisions. But she was a good person, they say, who never recovered from physical and emotional abuse at an early age...

Shannan, the eldest of four sisters, had a troubled home life and entered the foster care system around age 7, said Sherre, now 23...

As a teenager, Shannan turned to alcohol, marijuana and late parties, her sister says...

"I’m not saying that she never would have tried those things, but I think that her life would have been a lot different," if not for the abuse, she said. "I kind of feel like she went to look for that, and that she went down that road … she basically wanted to be loved..."

Gilbert, who had always felt self-conscious about her looks, was dropping weight quickly, and her stomach was flat as a board, Diaz said.

She started using cocaine and Ecstasy, he said. If a woman agreed to use drugs with johns, she could bring in more money, Diaz said.

Gilbert had "several abortions," thinking it wasn’t a good choice to have a kid, Diaz said...

One night, Gilbert came home intoxicated and started a fight, Diaz said.

"I retaliated and hit her back," he said. "I hit her too hard."

The punch fractured the left side of her jaw, which needed a metal plate to be fixed, he said. The plate would make her body easily identifiable, should it be found...

Per WS rules, repeating what has been printed in a recognized Major Media Publication (The Star Ledger) and quoting a person's sister's and boyfriend's statements as published in that paper IS NOT "Slandering the Victim" (by the way, Slander is only for Spoke Words). I think you were implying that it was Libel (which is written words). But that's neither her nor there because looking into and repeating the facts of a case is simply good, unbiased detective work. We aren't bashing anyone or attempting to place blame on the SG for her own death. You cannot just simply assume that this is a homicide case and discredit any evidence that might point away from it being a homicide.

If you want to use a narrow-minded approach and only want to believe that a one-legged strange doctor was responsible for SG's death then that is your decision to do so. I, on the other hand, choose to keep an open mind and consider all options until further evidence convinces me otherwise. Keeping an open mind means to weigh out all options and not to ignore the facts of a case. If you don't agree with the facts being posted then simply hit the ignore button.

 

[WINDSOR]

Things are getting silly now.

There are two sides now, being staunchly defended.

*** Those that believe SG was a victim of 'foul-play' and/or criminal activity.

*** Those who believe that choices in life SG made lead to her untimely death.

Either side could be right, and their is enough evidence and non-evidence to support either attitude.

Let us assume for a moment SG died without anybody's criminal involvement. Neither CPH, JB,MP or any other suspects did anything wrong.

What we are left with is a LISK who is responsible for those other bodies and any relationship to SG's death is pure coincidence.

SG's life and death turns into a morality play about choices people make and how they affect their lives. No more sleuthing is required.

If on the other hand there is some linkage between SG and the LISK we have a obligation to search for that linkage. Some might say we are wasting time looking for a linkage that does not exist and it pulls us away from 100% focus on the LISK.

In reality things do happen serendipitously and there is a chance that even if no foul play is involved with SG there still is a chance we can learn something about the LISK.

If I can suggest, those of you that believe no foul play was involved, stop arguing and trying to disprove those of us who believe in the foul play theory.

You may believe we foul play theorists are stubborn, obstinate, just plain wrong and maybe not too bright. But let us go on in our fantasy. Do not comment on our theories that you find objectionable. Concentrate on the LISK without the SG drama.

Then we SG foul-play theorists can work our magic.

MOO

 

[Seaslug44]

Things are getting silly now.

There are two sides now, being staunchly defended.

*** Those that believe SG was a victim of 'foul-play' and/or criminal activity.

*** Those who believe that choices in life SG made lead to her untimely death.
MOO

I am sorry but I have to disagree with you because you are making the same exact incorrect observation as those who have been initiating the attacks.

Yes there are two sides but your description is off-base;

-One side believes that SG was a victim of a serial killer who resides in OB.

-The other side wants to keep ALL OPTIONS open.

There is no side that believes that the choices that SG made in life lead to her untimely death. By you posting that you are simply adding fuel to the fire.

Who do you think here believes that SG is responsible for her own death????

I have not seen one post by someone that says that this is what they believe to be the truth.

 

[Peter Brendt]

Mr. B said, "How would I know whether my IQ is higher than yours if I don't know yours? And then, IQ isn't everything. IQ doesn't really determine what you fo, only how effective you do it after you decided to do anything at all. Rifkin has an IQ of 128 and still, he was in many aspects unable to live. So, the mere IQ in itself isn't everything,, it is what you do with it. But admittedly, my IQ is high enough to afford to dismiss IQ as measure of all things."

I was being facetious. Your posts come across (to at least me anyway) as ego driven and extremely arrogant, passive aggressive, and spewing with sarcastic venom. You obviously have a small keyboard complex. But hey, if it makes you feel better about yourself to insult others by addressing them in a demeaning manner, then continue on.
By your posts, I would sense your time here is more about stroking your own ego than helping to catch a killer and support the families who are suffering.

1.) I have to insist on "active aggressive", not "passive aggressive". And I have a low threshold for stupidity, I will admit to that as well.

2.) If you feel it venomous and sarcastic that I can't take the same technical impossible theory warmed up for the umpteenth kind too serious anymore, so be it. It's not that I really care what you think about me, the only thing I really care about in this thread and on this board, is the case. And to make it clear, "the case" means here the LISK. SG is only one factor in it and as far as I can see, not connected.

3.) It was always the tactics of propagandists, to accuse others of motives that would if they were true, serve the propagandist's case. And as those propagandists know, repeating the nonsense leads to believe in the ******** which, for their purposes is almost as good as truth even it has, of course, nothing to do with truth. So you try to imprint me as some kind of sicko while you still forgot to sweep the foam off your mouth? Humm, lets just say, you have to work on that, do you?

And back to the case. After it's clear, SG made a phone call of 23 minutes, a time in which NOBODY tried to kill her, and after she made it also out of the house (which is obvious, since Coletti saw her), the case for a murder is weaker than weak. Since she was already off the road and in the marsh, any theory of murder has to explain (additional to the issues why she could call 911 for such a long time without anybody interrupting and how she made it out of the house in the first place):

- how would the killer find her? She was already running around in the marsh, in a thicket with thousand possibilities to hide.

- how would the killer chase her without witnesses seeing him going in the marsh?

- how would he, since the theories include later body placement, come out of that marsh with a body and nobody paid attention?

- where would he store her body? How? He couldn't freeze her (that would have caused evidence), he couldn't embalm her (that would have cause evidence). So how?

- And since the CPH theory is also involved, how would a one legged man hunted her down in a marsh? And please, no assumptions about Superman or special athletics prosthetic for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

- How could he do it anyway, since it was already daylight. The night was over, no discrete killing in the darkness possible anymore.

There are a lot of questions, that, as long as you don't deliver satisfying answers or at least reasonable possibilities for them, weaken your case. Which is probably the reason, you go all rabid on anyone mentioning that weakness.

Peter

 

[Peter Brendt]

Things are getting silly now.

There are two sides now, being staunchly defended.

*** Those that believe SG was a victim of 'foul-play' and/or criminal activity.

*** Those who believe that choices in life SG made lead to her untimely death.

Either side could be right, and their is enough evidence and non-evidence to support either attitude.

Let us assume for a moment SG died without anybody's criminal involvement. Neither CPH, JB,MP or any other suspects did anything wrong.

What we are left with is a LISK who is responsible for those other bodies and any relationship to SG's death is pure coincidence.

SG's life and death turns into a morality play about choices people make and how they affect their lives. No more sleuthing is required.

If on the other hand there is some linkage between SG and the LISK we have a obligation to search for that linkage. Some might say we are wasting time looking for a linkage that does not exist and it pulls us away from 100% focus on the LISK.

In reality things do happen serendipitously and there is a chance that even if no foul play is involved with SG there still is a chance we can learn something about the LISK.

If I can suggest, those of you that believe no foul play was involved, stop arguing and trying to disprove those of us who believe in the foul play theory.

You may believe we foul play theorists are stubborn, obstinate, just plain wrong and maybe not too bright. But let us go on in our fantasy. Do not comment on our theories that you find objectionable. Concentrate on the LISK without the SG drama.

Then we SG foul-play theorists can work our magic.

MOO

Now, that's a deal, especially if it is done in a civil way without rhetoric feigns like "blaming the victim" accusations or "you are interested only" accusations.
So, here is my list (again)- First "Foul play per se":

- SG was on the phone with 911 for 23 minutes. In this time, nobody tried to kill her nor to interrupt. How is this possible? Let out LISK here for the moment, but in general, which wannabe killer would sit right next to her and do nothing?

- SG after that made it out of the house. Which indicates, the alleged killer was not prepared to subdue her after the call was finished. So which wannabe killer would do that?

- After she left the house, the next and last point, she was seen, was at Coletti's place. Pak arrived only a little later, no trace of any of the other favorite suspects. That means, at this point, she had already a head start. She could have knocked on other doors, she could maybe have forced entry in Coletti's house, she could have screamed through all of the neighborhood, making murdering her virtually impossible. She did nothing of that. She first searches cover behind a boat and runs then into the marsh. Why?

- She was found about 1 1/2 years after her death. Now, some argue, she was later placed there. Which would need the cooperation of a fist class forensic anthropologist. To puzzle together skeletal remains without twisting the remains of brittle ligature, to place every little bone in a way, it would fall down during a natural decomposition process, that's a class A stunner. So that part of the foul-play theory would be only credible, if there would be a Dr. Michael Baden or a Dr. Temperance Brennan in with this murder conspiracy. So either, we dismiss this part, or you may tell me, which world class forensic anthropologist played here the willing accessory to murder.

- The foul play theory includes also (at least in one variant) a one legged doctor hunting a young woman in daylight through the marsh (aka thicket) and even catching her. I think, this speaks pretty much for itself. I'm sorry, but I can't even begin to imagine any line of reasoning that would make this credible.

- The foul play theory (in another variant) would include a driver, Pak. Pak was seen by Coletti with his SUV. The SUV was unable to follow into the marsh, so if one wants to argue, Pak went in and killed her there, the question is, where was his car? It had to be somewhere and, since it was early morning, people were waking up, it would have drawn a little attention.

- The foul play theory (in again another variant) would assume, Vrewer killed her. Problem is, Coletti didn't see Brewer. Which means Brewer didn't see Coletti either. So Brewer also couldn't have seen SG running in the marsh. In other words, he wouldn't have known where to look for SG in the first place. Only chance is, if Pak called Brewer in this time window to tell him. Which would show in Pak's and Brewer's phone records. And if it would show there, LE would have them already, so how to bridge that gap?

Okay, next category is about linking SG and LISK:

LISK wraps his victims and placed them along one stretch of road in a dump site which is revistable and can be revisited in drive-by.

SG was in a marsh, unwrapped and in a location which made revisiting, not even talking drive-by, virtually impossible.

LISK's victims disappeared and if we look at the places they were last seen, the homicidal john theory doesn't hold water. MBB was last heard from from a bus terminal. Now one can construct and twist, but that's the point. MW went out of a hotel. Maybe to meet a john, maybe not. And if, she was snatched maybe before, during or after that interaction. But if we decide for "during", this makes only sense, if all of the GB4 had the same last customer. Anyway, whatever hit them, it came unexpected.

SG was driven out by Pak to a well defined address. Which in itself shows, Brewewr obviously isn't LISK. Because otherwise, he would be the only SK giving his address to a potential witness before the kill.

LISK is medium to high organized. He plans and he works his plan. In the meantime, he has honed his skills down to a science, much like a routine process.

All the persons involved in the SG case behaved like a bunch of monkeys in panic. Starting with CPH who tried to win time, Brewer, who ended up with that ridiculous lie detector test (and he was lucky the operator wasn'T smarter than him) and Pak, who obviously moved his rear into his vcar to search for SG instead following her on foot (he lost time and mobility). I find it hard, to imagine any of them as organized SK.

So, here it is, work your magic!

Peter

 

[Samantha Spade]

Pb,
Ha! You have a low threshhold for stupidity?!

Now isn't THAT a knee slapper! If you would once get off your high horse to challenge some of your own assumptions instead of critiquing and putting down others in a PASSIVE aggressive way, you will realize you have your moments of, let's say -- less than smart.

 

[Peter Brendt]

Pb,
Ha! You have a low threshhold for stupidity?!

Now isn't THAT a knee slapper! If you would once get off your high horse to challenge some of your own assumptions instead of critiquing and putting down others in a PASSIVE aggressive way, you will realize you have your moments of, let's say -- less than smart.

Oh well, what did I say?

December 2010, when the first bodies popped up, I said, there would be more - check

March 2011, I profiled there are two SKs around. - the vote on that is still open, at least as long as you ignore then entirely opposite signatures.

March or April 2011, I said the first time, SG's body is out there in the marsh - check

June, I had my profile so far ready to put it on my website. All I predicted is either still open or proven yet. Not one mistake yet - check

I mentioned at least two times, it would be a good idea to look at the tapes of traffic cams along the Expressway before those were overwritten - hard to prove, botched by SCPD till the tapes were overwritten.

I predicted, when they catch LISK, they will find, he grew up in NYC. - this is still in the open.

and so on and so on. So technically, all I predicted is in the meantime either proven right or still open since there is no chance without LE's cooperation to prove it. Which I consider kind of a deadlock. Sooo, if my not so smart moments are the moments, I make predictions, nobody want to believe in, but which prove later as accurate, guess, what can be done, if you stop foaming out of your mouth and start to do something productive. At the moment, from my point of view, you're just a waste of time.

Peter

 

[sean62185]

Originally Posted by Seaslug44
Where would drug induced coma, heart attack, stroke or passing out & dying of hypothermia fit in?

What is the probability I ask again, that on a relatively warm morning SG would die of hypothermia? (not likely)

If it was a drug induced coma, the coma risk probably would decrease as time passed. If she had the drugs at JB's; a considerable amount of time had passed (hours) until she reached the place her remains were found (not likely)

Heart Attack, Stroke? Any reason to believe she had Cardio problems? Family History? Obesity? Angina? High Blood Pressure? (not likely cause of death)

Seaslug44, anything is possible, but I think we should focus on probable.

MOO

If she was doing ecstasy and cocaine that night, it is possible she passed away from basically an OD.

http://www.thebody.com/content/art38411.html

If someone is really high and using stimulants like speed, cocaine, or ecstasy...

Pupils will be enlarged
Very alert and energetic euphoric
They might be paranoid and agitated
Decreased appetite

Pressure,
tightness or pain in chest
Difficulty breathing
Headache,
ringing in the ears,
dizziness Foaming at the mouth
Profuse sweating, or failure to sweat
Racing pulse
Grossly enlarged pupils
Muscle cramps
Inability to urinate
Nausea and vomiting Shaking
or seizures Loss of consciousness

Depending on an individuals reaction would be enough to explain what happened that night.

 

[sean62185]

To go along with my above post..

If she had a combination of a couple of drugs, around people she didn't know in a place far far away from her comfort area, it could explain the paranoia. It would explain why JP and MP acted the way they did. The reason why MP said "she's going to get in trouble" or some variation. If she was mentally altered from a combination of cocaine and ecstasy and caught by police, she would be arrested, taken to a hospital until she drys out and a whole mess of problems for her. That line of thinking might be why he said what he said.

Her cause of death could be anything from seizures, dehydration, hypotension, hypertention, syncope. Which all can be directly related to mixing those 2 drugs or a combination of either drug with alcohol.

Her things being dropped, could be explained by some sort of peaked altered mental status. Her running through the thicket with her litterally feeling no pain.. until her body finally had enough and collapsed where it laid.

I am not saying that's how it went down. Because I don't know, but it makes sense. I think there is a good possability that occured, and its not something that is rare. That kind of stuff happens all the time. Which could be why the police didn't take it seriously.

 

[hawkshaw]

When I was in grade school my IQ was charted at 148. So much for IQ tests. I don't need to have an IQ to know my number is not nearly close to that. Maybe a 110, but no higher. I just had a very good day when the test was given to me.

I am convinced I got that high score because I was a very proficient reader by the time I was a little man. I was an only child and had to entertain myself......so I read, mostly comic books. When I didn't understand the words I went to the dictionary. I believe to this day that my ability to read on a higher level than my fellow students gave me a big edge on taking the test. Trust me, my IQ is no where near 148.

I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how SG was killed. I am just going with the probabilities, nothing else. MY GUESS has always been and will be until proven otherwise is SG was the victim of a sex trading organization. If not her, then certainly the four other working girls that were found nearby where SG was found.

I also believe there is at least one poster on this Board that has this right, or close to being right. Only time will tell, if it does tell us anything at all.

Once you accept that detectives are more of a mystique than a reality, then you may accept this case is as far away from being solved as the outer stars in the Universe. Or it can be sitting right out there staring in your face.

 

[sean62185]

When I was in grade school my IQ was charted at 148. So much for IQ tests. I don't need to have an IQ to know my number is not nearly close to that. Maybe a 110, but no higher. I just had a very good day when the test was given to me.

I am convinced I got that high score because I was a very proficient reader by the time I was a little man. I was an only child and had to entertain myself......so I read, mostly comic books. When I didn't understand the words I went to the dictionary. I believe to this day that my ability to read on a higher level than my fellow students gave me a big edge on taking the test. Trust me, my IQ is no where near 148.

I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how SG was killed. I am just going with the probabilities, nothing else. MY GUESS has always been and will be until proven otherwise is SG was the victim of a sex trading organization. If not her, then certainly the four other working girls that were found nearby where SG was found.

I also believe there is at least one poster on this Board that has this right, or close to being right. Only time will tell, if it does tell us anything at all.

Once you accept that detectives are more of a mystique than a reality, then you may accept this case is as far away from being solved as the outer stars in the Universe. Or it can be sitting right out there staring in your face.

I am curious, whats your reasoning for thinking she was a victim of some sort of sex trade? What evidence is there to suggest this?

 

[susan1122]

When I was in grade school my IQ was charted at 148. So much for IQ tests. I don't need to have an IQ to know my number is not nearly close to that. Maybe a 110, but no higher. I just had a very good day when the test was given to me.

I am convinced I got that high score because I was a very proficient reader by the time I was a little man. I was an only child and had to entertain myself......so I read, mostly comic books. When I didn't understand the words I went to the dictionary. I believe to this day that my ability to read on a higher level than my fellow students gave me a big edge on taking the test. Trust me, my IQ is no where near 148.

I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how SG was killed. I am just going with the probabilities, nothing else. MY GUESS has always been and will be until proven otherwise is SG was the victim of a sex trading organization. If not her, then certainly the four other working girls that were found nearby where SG was found.

I also believe there is at least one poster on this Board that has this right, or close to being right. Only time will tell, if it does tell us anything at all.

Once you accept that detectives are more of a mystique than a reality, then you may accept this case is as far away from being solved as the outer stars in the Universe. Or it can be sitting right out there staring in your face.

I think your ideas about IQ are right on. IMO, a good day or a bad day can play a big part. I liked your story, too...about when you were young. Most of your thoughts have strong logic behind them. Jmo.

 

[Peter Brendt]

When I was in grade school my IQ was charted at 148. So much for IQ tests. I don't need to have an IQ to know my number is not nearly close to that. Maybe a 110, but no higher. I just had a very good day when the test was given to me.

I am convinced I got that high score because I was a very proficient reader by the time I was a little man. I was an only child and had to entertain myself......so I read, mostly comic books. When I didn't understand the words I went to the dictionary. I believe to this day that my ability to read on a higher level than my fellow students gave me a big edge on taking the test. Trust me, my IQ is no where near 148.

I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA how SG was killed. I am just going with the probabilities, nothing else. MY GUESS has always been and will be until proven otherwise is SG was the victim of a sex trading organization. If not her, then certainly the four other working girls that were found nearby where SG was found.

I also believe there is at least one poster on this Board that has this right, or close to being right. Only time will tell, if it does tell us anything at all.

Once you accept that detectives are more of a mystique than a reality, then you may accept this case is as far away from being solved as the outer stars in the Universe. Or it can be sitting right out there staring in your face.

Well, a 148 at least brings you in a position that you can afford dismiss such numbers without sounding angry for not having them. It just sounds different from someone with a measured 148 than from someone with a measured 80.
However, IQ or not, but what is your evidence connecting the GB4 to sex trafficking., You talk organized crime if I understand you right?

 

[scandi]

I think sometimes posters have a tendency to make cases overly complicated. When it all boils down, I bet Shannan's last few hours leading up to and including her death will be found to be a very simple situation, like:

. . . after partying for a couple of hours she ran to the wrong place at the right time and was nabbed by a guy who pulled her into his car/truck and then murdered her.

Simple, could be true or may not. But I don't think anything about her IQ has anything to do with her going missing. IMO



PS: In the Scott Peterson case we learned many things that were used to speculate about what really happened to Laci and Connor. It turns out almost none of those things happened. So I have been very guilty of making a case overly complicated. Believe me. ;}

 

[susan1122]

Can anyone fill me in on when this new 48 Hours is airing? I can't find the info. Sorry if I'm OT.