Found Deceased Spain - Esther Dingley, from UK, missing in the Pyrenees, November 2020 #3

[Ruthbullock]

It looks like that would be off by quite a bit. The sign at the Hospice shows 3 hours to the Port de Venasque. And ED was up yet higher by about 1/2 hour. For an extremely skilled hiker with daypack, down from the top of the Pic to the Hospice, it's 3 hours firm.
Some of my concern with the "how far could ED go before darkness" question puts the trip in an extremely high risk category. For a risk-savvy person, solo, isolated, in winter, with no need to "make miles", this should not be where the mind is going. If the mind was going there, there's something very, very, wrong, and it would be impossible to imagine where that person would end up that night.

I think we have misunderstood that sign, the more rotes I have found, the more indicate it was a much shorter walk than we first thought. This version of the route takes 3hr 45 min (again a full loop) . Interestingly I have found myself drawn into finding the depths of the lac de boums aka lac de venasque. One is deeper than the others, lac superior. This isn’t the one the refuge is on and when you look at route maps it is unlikely ED was near the largest of the three lakes. However I digress, the route to the hospice I am now personally satisfied (many, many routes recorded on AllTrails, plus various blogs and DC stating it was an hour and half to the road either way
From the refuge) was within almost grasping distance that evening and she has cycled via the hospice de France several times, over several years - so whilst she may or may not have walked up that path before- from all the photographs we have seen ED would certainly know that the final part of that pathway is very open and not steep and would be possible with a head torch.
I’m not sure that is what happened or where she went that evening, but IMO she could have continued on her journey if she wished to with reasonable confidence she would arrive safely at the hospice.

 

[Puzzles]

Is there a websleuth thread about the Australian thread mentioned?

Yes, Inverloch. Under Amy Schulkins.

 

[Quietey]

The cables are half way up to the Pic from the Port.

Is this looking at the right place?

• The first screenshot is as seen from a photosphere point on Google Maps (i've had to reduce the image size considerably to post) - the orange figure is looking directly over two boumes at a point somewhere between the Pic and the Port.
• The second screenshot is zooming in from a closer photosphere location (just over one boume) and shows the path - Im guessing that the cables are in the area that is in the shadow from the crag?
• The third screenshot is an ariel view of the boume - it looks as though the side of the boume nearest to the mountain is deep, ie no shallow edge

Difficult to tell how steep it is because of the perspective.... but looks pretty darned steep to me, with deep water below. I am guessing that this would be one of the most intensively searched areas.

1.


2.


3.

 

[axelcruze]

“Stretched out like a rubber band
Stressed out like a working man
All I need is a helping hand from
Someone who loves me”....

“A little love is medicine.”

On Oct 19, on her FB a page, Esther reveals she is going thru a “difficult time” again with “some soul searching.” Esther says that the helping hand she so desperately needed...came from a stranger...from Alex Boyle’s music.

She mentions going running and listening to his album “six times and crying at so many points.”

This is about one month before she disappears.

Edited to add...she posts this while they are together at the rental house, just three days before she leaves on her trip.

They have a lot of public information out there, almost like they wanted to be adventure YouTube vloggers, but When I read the blogs and Amazon book intros, the material is about their personal lives and less about the adventures. Maybe she got tired of this and didn't agree or like the blogs or books, didn't want to spend time together (controlling perhaps) and wanted to escape what she felt was a broken relationship, but did not know how to do this.

 

[Grouse]

They have a lot of public information out there, almost like they wanted to be adventure YouTube vloggers, but When I read the blogs and Amazon book intros, the material is about their personal lives and less about the adventures. Maybe she got tired of this and didn't agree or like the blogs or books, didn't want to spend time together (controlling perhaps) and wanted to escape what she felt was a broken relationship, but did not know how to do this.

I saw the books on Amazon, and some of the reviews. The books I saw did seem on the face of it to be hiking related but I pulled back at that point and decided I didn't want to get any closer in.

 

[Muva]

DBM

 

[Muva]

The food thing is starting to make sense - if there were food issues and a need to control intake then it makes sense she would carry little but if she got desperate for food then she would ask. It seems she was on bare minimum rations but the energy she was using probably created a need to ask strangers

I'm wondering whether this was another aspect of "pushing herself" and where the concept originated.

 

[RickshawFan]

Did you manage to find the source for this BTW?

I got off on a detour adding up all the weight ED must have had in her pack.

 

[fridaybaker]

As I was out walking just now, I began to think about "going beyond one's comfort zone" and what that really entails. I thought I'd make some comments with the idea of re-setting or perhaps developing where the conversation seems to be drifting.
These are philosophical ideas and not necessarily applicable to the current case, but perhaps they will expand our thinking.

For me, I evaluate "being beyond one's comfort zone" in two poles.
Pole 1 "Going beyond one's comfort zone" is a way of embracing life.
Pole 2 "Going beyond one's comfort zone" is a way of flirting with death.

We likely have all voluntarily dipped into both poles.

Pole 1 can range from the banal "I went TOTALLY out of my comfort zone yesterday and had popcorn for breakfast." True story. Or "Let me deepen the stretch on my hamstrings." Or "It will almost certainly scare me to death, but I'm going to try that 10-story roller coaster."

Pole 2 looks more like tempting fate, as in "I wonder how long I can hold my breath underwater? I've got to train myself not to respond to my first few itches to re-surface." Or "I'm going to climb the most difficult face of K2 in winter, even though the odds of having a fatal accident even in season on the easy route are astronomical." True story, by the way: it happened this last weekend to a top mountaineer.

Pole 1 accounts for risk and navigates through fear.
Pole 2 grasps the risk and it turns Pole-2-ers on.
I would surmise there are emotional conditions on either pole.

******
Before I hit "post", I want to allow for the possibility that you could be at Pole 1, but make a mistake. For instance, I decided one day to "beat my personal best" on an exercise bicycle. This was clearly a Pole 1 position.
I thought I was in the correct heart-rate zone for me, around 155 beats per minute. And, woohoo! I did beat my personal best by a few seconds. However, BIG MISTAKE, I almost gave myself a heart attack. I ended up in the ER for hours, white as a sheet, nauseous, indigestion, pain shooting down my left arm, EKG all over the place, stabbing in the back..... And...they wanted me to go inpatient. My BIG mistake? I was MILES wrong about the optimal beats per minute.
So, Pole 1 can result in accidents or miscalculations, but it is still not in the vein of "flirting with death".

So, are we looking at Pole 1 or Pole 2 when it comes to this case? Opinions?

Pole 2, moo.

 

[RedHaus]

So, are we looking at Pole 1 or Pole 2 when it comes to this case? Opinions?

snipped for focus

IMO, for public viewing ED is on Pole 1 but for her own viewing ED is on Pole 2. And perhaps ED oscillates between the two Poles based on internal and external triggers.

I believe ED is a kind and gentle soul. Sadly, I also believe whatever was going on in November for her may have exacerbated a slide down Pole 2.

 

[RickshawFan]

Pole 2, moo.

This is 100% speculation on my part. I have no idea how other people's heads really work, and I don't know ED.
I agree with Pole 2. But I think she's normally in Pole 1.
Maybe Pole 2 drew her to the Pic on the 22nd? So late in the afternoon? She'd almost certainly be alone. It's tempting to think she'd not want that at all, that she wanted community and connection. However, in everything she wrote about this trip, she wanted alone. And she was very alone indeed.
Was she up on the Pic by herself on the 21st? Maybe she wanted a do-over because there were other people there? Maybe, as a poster suggested upthread, she was scoping out where she would go and what she would do, and expected follow-through from herself the next day?
This may also account for ED's ambivalence, as well as her retreat to the Cabane (seriously, why didn't she descend to the Refuge on the 21st and get a head start on her long hike?).
Perhaps "I can see you from here" was a form of goodbye?
I'm thinking the dangerous situation she was in was much less straightforward than the hazards of taking on an isolated trail, solo, in winter, short on food, which was dangerous enough...Pole 2 already. But there are also ways to be in a dangerous mental state, IMO, times when you need help and comfort, when you can be beset by despair. IMO this can easily put a person full-on into Pole 2, maybe temporarily, but in that place where you're flirting with "putting your life on the line."
I'm using the word "flirt" deliberately, because I don't believe people in Pole 2 necessarily want to succumb entirely to danger. Rather, they want to feel it out, engage it, know it, get the sensation, try it on, flutter along the line where you have a high chance of losing it all. IMO misery can do that to you.
And maybe, too, drifting into Pole 2 is a way to settle a life-transforming decision, whatever that might be (it appears ED had more than 1 to make, because she was in a difficult place in several areas of her life.), as though the universe could tell you what to do or agree with your plan if only you encountered the universe straight on.

Moreover, AFAIK being calorie-deficient can exacerbate that place because it messes with your brain; you can just plain lose touch.

Again, this is total speculation from me in this post. And it's about how I imagine a human's brain might work, not a set of facts I know.
And I still think ED had an accident. Perhaps, though, as I spell out my thoughts here, simultaneous with Pole 2.

 

[RedHaus]

We did hear this earlier. Someone in either the Spanish or French side of the investigation mentioned then. Then Esther's husband went to some lengths to clarify the record and say this was a misunderstanding, they were still together, still all right as as couple. It's in the first thread.

@10ofRods and @PeggyHenry, I didn't go back to the first thread for this, but was poking around tonight on that recent LA hiker story about ED and found this. Here is a quote that may be what you are thinking of - prior media coverage of police being concerned with ED's / DC's relationship. I am sure there are other stories about this.

"According to police, he [DC] is a witness and not a suspect, but authorities added her home life was not as "idyllic" as her social media posts suggested."

Missing hiker Esther Dingley's campervan 'spotted with someone sleeping inside' - NZ Herald

 

[Hatty]

Snipped for focus
Very selfish and very dangerous. IMO this is not someone who is actively assessing risk and taking corresponding precautions.
It's possible ED thinks she's risk-averse, however.

I personally get super annoyed when others on the trail seem to expect that everyone else can accommodate them so they can go ultralight 'cos aren't they special. Grrr....

I think we need to be careful to judge the poor girl based on the British tabloid press.

 

[PeggyHenry]

All the little snippets of information are creating the impression that Esther was very vulnerable, physically and mentally.
For this reason she may have had an accident whilst in rough terrain, may have been manipulated by a third party, or may have felt mentally unable to carry on. IMO the latter is least likely. I think Esther has a lot of strength.
Having observed how information is being gradually released it seems to me that the police have some idea and there is a reason why they are allowing bits of pertinent information to be released at intervals.

 

[stmarysmead]

This is 100% speculation on my part. I have no idea how other people's heads really work, and I don't know ED.
I agree with Pole 2. But I think she's normally in Pole 1.
Maybe Pole 2 drew her to the Pic on the 22nd? So late in the afternoon? She'd almost certainly be alone. It's tempting to think she'd not want that at all, that she wanted community and connection. However, in everything she wrote about this trip, she wanted alone. And she was very alone indeed.
Was she up on the Pic by herself on the 21st? Maybe she wanted a do-over because there were other people there? Maybe, as a poster suggested upthread, she was scoping out where she would go and what she would do, and expected follow-through from herself the next day?
This may also account for ED's ambivalence, as well as her retreat to the Cabane (seriously, why didn't she descend to the Refuge on the 21st and get a head start on her long hike?).
Perhaps "I can see you from here" was a form of goodbye?
I'm thinking the dangerous situation she was in was much less straightforward than the hazards of taking on an isolated trail, solo, in winter, short on food, which was dangerous enough...Pole 2 already. But there are also ways to be in a dangerous mental state, IMO, times when you need help and comfort, when you can be beset by despair. IMO this can easily put a person full-on into Pole 2, maybe temporarily, but in that place where you're flirting with "putting your life on the line."
I'm using the word "flirt" deliberately, because I don't believe people in Pole 2 necessarily want to succumb entirely to danger. Rather, they want to feel it out, engage it, know it, get the sensation, try it on, flutter along the line where you have a high chance of losing it all. IMO misery can do that to you.
And maybe, too, drifting into Pole 2 is a way to settle a life-transforming decision, whatever that might be (it appears ED had more than 1 to make, because she was in a difficult place in several areas of her life.), as though the universe could tell you what to do or agree with your plan if only you encountered the universe straight on.

Moreover, AFAIK being calorie-deficient can exacerbate that place because it messes with your brain; you can just plain lose touch.

Again, this is total speculation from me in this post. And it's about how I imagine a human's brain might work, not a set of facts I know.
And I still think ED had an accident. Perhaps, though, as I spell out my thoughts here, simultaneous with Pole 2.

Well yes, there are always things that it's right to question but we could fill an entire thread just based on general hiking advice. While it does seem ED/DCs's approach is unconventional I think the many 1000's of miles of trekking they have done is not to be sniffed at/dismissed on here. MOO.

Dan, who knows her best, has given such a loving and detailed description of Esther in his dossier. She certainly is physically strong and she is experienced in regard to the activities that comprise their lifestyle. She is also very intelligent and her multiple degrees confirm this.

Emotionally, Esther is exquisitely sensitive and abundantly caring. Dan tells us this and we have her own social media to confirm this. But IMO, this aspect of this lovely woman is both her blessing and her curse.

People, even those of us posting here, are drawn to her as she exudes such a depth of caring and emotional intelligence. She feels everything so deeply. Maybe far too deeply for her own mental health. I sense she is a bit of people pleaser. Was she really carrying such a tiny bit of nourishment to “travel light” or was she trying not to not impact an already strained budget?

So i wonder in my speculation, how would an overly sensitive person like Esther bring herself...perhaps...to make changes in her life that might devastate her partner of so many years? How does she self-care...which she writes continually about...if emotionally, she knows that what her self-care requires, will upturn a loved ones entire world?

Esther liked to travel light but I think she was weighted down with many, many emotional burdens on this trip. As an emotional person myself, I can attest to the distraction that envelops your brain when emotion assumes control. I wonder if all those calls, contacts on the top of the Pic just enveloped her mind as she proceeded on and contributed to a careless fatal mistake?

Or did she decide that it all seemed too complicated. All speculation on my part of course.

 

[PeggyHenry]

A post of great insight - thanks

 

[RickshawFan]

I think we need to be careful to judge the poor girl based on the British tabloid press.

Apologies for my share of this misunderstanding. Actually, there is context missing here.
My sentence responded to a post by another poster, and includes personal observations about times when my safety has been risked by hikers I don't know and who expected me to accommodate them.
My sentence does not reflect or refer to tabloid press. We have ED's own words, as well as the dossier. I'm not sure I've even read the tabloids.

I have asked the mod to remove my quoted post, so there's no further confusion.

 

[RickshawFan]

Well yes, there are always things that it's right to question but we could fill an entire thread just based on general hiking advice. While it does seem ED/DCs's approach is unconventional I think the many 1000's of miles of trekking they have done is not to be sniffed at/dismissed on here. MOO.

IMO COVID made the isolated conditions of the hike something everyone had no experience with. Plus, it was November, not July.

 

[patCee]

All the little snippets of information are creating the impression that Esther was very vulnerable, physically and mentally.

Not sure about her being physically vulnerable,as she is described as very fit and strong, but certainly mentally. Thinking of the conversation she had with Laura who she spent some time with in the mountains, "they were on a break" and not sure whether they would continue together. A real dilemma as I'm not sure how ED would manage to continue her lifestyle alone. Also DCs social media before his illness when he described 'romance gone' and immense loathing. How do you get past that? By the distraction of a new lifestyle? (rhetorical questions).

I'm also surprised DC didn't join ED for a short time on her month away. To his credit he was fit and able to join SAR in the search for her. Though I'm surprised SAR supported that.

I'm interested in the overnight she had at the refuge on the 21st before the 2nd ascent to the Pic de S and if she changed her route to return there. Vehicles can drive up to the refuge where it's likely she could /would have accepted a lift from anyone.

 

[stmarysmead]

Apologies for my share of this misunderstanding. Actually, there is context missing here.
My sentence responded to a post by another poster, and includes personal observations about times when my safety has been risked by hikers I don't know and who expected me to accommodate them.
My sentence does not reflect or refer to tabloid press. We have ED's own words, as well as the dossier. I'm not sure I've even read the tabloids.

I have asked the mod to remove my quoted post, so there's no further confusion.

Yes, it was my post you responded to. My reaction was also based on blog entries of Esther’s as well as media coverage. This repeated dependency on “the kindness of others” seems to me to be a strange concept...but in wilderness situations, where food equates in some cases to survival, it’s dangerous to both parties. IMO of course.

Esther seemed, in my opinion, to view it though as confirmation of how good people were...like a test that humanity was passing. Like she was offering strangers the opportunity to show their virtue, their generosity.

I’ve tried since then to consider a second explanation...that perhaps her repeated extensions away from home are stretching the budget, or expenses are being cited in order to convince her to come home. But, I must admit, if the witness is being quoted correctly and Esther’s response is a truthful one, I do still think carrying insufficient food and depending on the kindness of others to carry more weight...so that you can carry less...is a selfish concept...as well as a foolish and dangerous one.