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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I stand corrected, partially.

I’ll rephrase the point I was trying to make tactfully, while attempting to remain within WS TOS:

Is there a *valid* reason why people are speculating about the dates (19th) some of Esther’s posts/photos were/may have been uploaded to IG & FB when there is LE confirmation that she was seen alive and in person after the date (19th) which seems to be causing “controversy”?

I.e. Is there any evidence admissible according to WS standards that dates of postings may have been manipulated to pre-date them?
I believe it’s just a consequence of having so little real information combined with at least one investigator expressing doubts that she was still “on the mountain” or a victim of an accident or a bear.

So that creates a situation where we look at the those alternative possibilities that are left...and each might involve an attempt to confuse searchers.
 
I understand the idea of scheduling your posts, but as far as I am aware you cannot schedule the replies or likes from random strangers? Let alone pre-date them? Would be strange if you could, and incomprehensible to the posters.

It’s been a while since you & I have found ourselves “sleuthing” on the same thread, @ZaZara, but I think we’re on the same wavelength (again).

I believe it’s just a consequence of having so little real information combined with at least one investigator expressing doubts that she was still “on the mountain” or a victim of an accident or a bear.

So that creates a situation where we look at the those alternative possibilities that are left...and each might involve an attempt to confuse searchers.

Very good point. Thank you.

I do have a (very) speculative theory about why there is putatively “one investigator” being “quoted” with remarks that cause confusion. I’m trying to formulate my thoughts on that in a way to post them without causing further confusion/controversy.
 
Bringing my own post about the timeline forward after cross-referencing IG & FB posts & updating it:

November 17th
- Leaves reffugio de Angel Orus (IG/FB & media interview with refuge manager/owner)

- Plans to hike a 2850m col, but turns back because the snow was to deep for the equipment she had with her and possibly camps out or goes back to reffugio de Angel.


November 18th
- Another day of hiking on a section of the GR11.2, sleeps at Cabana Santa Ana.


November 19th
- Hikes 2550m mountain, intending to camp/stay in a caban for another night. Weather is not great (rain and wind).

- Reaches summit, meets nice hiker (first person she’s seen in 2 days), who takes the (full length) pictures of her at the summit (on *her* phone) & offers her a lift either further up the valley or back the her camper in Benasque. She accepts lift back to camper because of weather.

- CCTV from Benasque supermarket (source Daily Mail)

November 20th
- no info


November 21st
- Sets off on hike again, beautiful weather and views of pic Aneto and Bagnieres de Luchon. Takes several photos including selfies.

November 21st or 22nd
- Seen by same woman from supermarket doing yoga by her camper at the carpark in Benasques

November 22nd
- speaks to father by phone.
- Speaks to D at some point.
- Seen by Olympic skier witness around 3pm on the trail ascending Salvaguardia.
- Sends selfie to D around 4 pm.
Bringing my own post about the timeline forward after cross-referencing IG & FB posts & updating it:

November 17th
- Leaves reffugio de Angel Orus (IG/FB & media interview with refuge manager/owner)

- Plans to hike a 2850m col, but turns back because the snow was to deep for the equipment she had with her and possibly camps out or goes back to reffugio de Angel.


November 18th
- Another day of hiking on a section of the GR11.2, sleeps at Cabana Santa Ana.


November 19th
- Hikes 2550m mountain, intending to camp/stay in a caban for another night. Weather is not great (rain and wind).

- Reaches summit, meets nice hiker (first person she’s seen in 2 days), who takes the (full length) pictures of her at the summit (on *her* phone) & offers her a lift either further up the valley or back the her camper in Benasque. She accepts lift back to camper because of weather.

- CCTV from Benasque supermarket (source Daily Mail)

November 20th
- no info


November 21st
- Sets off on hike again, beautiful weather and views of pic Aneto and Bagnieres de Luchon. Takes several photos including selfies.

November 21st or 22nd
- Seen by same woman from supermarket doing yoga by her camper at the carpark in Benasques

November 22nd
- speaks to father by phone.
- Speaks to D at some point.
- Seen by Olympic skier witness around 3pm on the trail ascending Salvaguardia.
- Sends selfie to D around 4 pm.

My first post so hope I format correctly etc ...

She checked in with her Dad on 22nd Nov. What was her routine for calling him? Every week, every couple of days? Could it potentially be significant that she checked in on 22nd - possibly knowing that she might not be able to for a while thereafter?
 

The caravan is clearly NOT in the car park in the photo that the dog walker took. Where the heck was it parked on Dec 2 when the dog walker took notice of it? It’s on grass in front of some sort of building
My first thought was that Dan by that time was in town looking and may have stayed the night in the van. But regardless that would certainly mess up any further forensic testing.
Ugh what a mess
 
The photo has the camper van on grass with buildings behind it. The article also states the campervan was parked up in a car park and has a picture of the car park (all tarmac, that we can see) and the photo I saw in another article about the campervan being searched showed it side on with a building alongside it, but not behind it. Either they have been moving the campervan round a lot before doing forensics (which seems unlikely) or some of the photos or reporting isn’t accurate.
 
It might have been Dan, who has been looking for Esther on his own. And I wouldn't be surprised if the author of that article knew that perfectly well, but chose to create a bit of "sensation" out of nothing.

It is the most obvious answer - Dan was sleeping there rather than driving the hour+ home each day. Stupid sensationalist tabloids.
 
Ok so the picture of the car park where Esther supposedly had been staying according to the Daily mail article I found through google street view to be the parking lot of the local school and recreation centre:
upload_2020-12-9_12-5-34.jpeg

Both facilities have been temporarily closed because of covid lockdown.

The picture that the dog walker took of the van occupied days later is NOT the car park of the school/ recreation centre.
What the heck?!?

And if her van was moved by Dan to another location why the heck would he have done so??? Unless he moved it further up the road to the Hopital de Benasque hotel and the entry to the hiking trails for it to be easier for him to search without having to walk back into town every time? But geez he should have known that the caravan might hold vital clues to whatever had happened to Esther.
 
Ok so the picture of the car park where Esther supposedly had been staying according to the Daily mail article I found through google street view to be the parking lot of the local school and recreation centre:
View attachment 274989

Both facilities have been temporarily closed because of covid lockdown.

The picture that the dog walker took of the van occupied days later is NOT the car park of the school/ recreation centre.
What the heck?!?

And if her van was moved by Dan to another location why the heck would he have done so??? Unless he moved it further up the road to the Hopital de Benasque hotel and the entry to the hiking trails for it to be easier for him to search without having to walk back into town every time? But geez he should have known that the caravan might hold vital clues to whatever had happened to Esther.
He did know, he brought the keys with him when he got to the area and gave them to police, according to reports.
 

Oooohhhkay. I had a metric ton of doubts about this story and this pic, so I employed my own little investigation. I've started from checking the weather, you can do it too, here:

Benasque Historical Weather

So, the picture of Esther's van with the light inside was allegedly snapped on December 2. Let me tell you that the temperature in Benasque was below freezing that day and it snowed. A lot. Almost whole day. And it was snowing heavily in the evening, when this picture was allegedly taken. Does it look like a wintery landscape to you? Can you spot even an ounce of snow in that picture? Because I can't. I suspect it might be some earlier photo, from before Esther went missing. And it certainly was not taken on the parking lot where Esther left her van.
 
Pictured: Missing British hiker Esther Dingley's Fiat camper van | Daily Mail Online
In this article it was parked on the street, before being moved to a local police station. This also has two photos of the campervan and whilst I think they are both at the side of the police station, one has the van much further forward against the building. I do wonder if it was much further back- would that match the location of the photo of someone apparently in the van.
 
Not sure re the style of posts, but if she spent time with the man descending and then accepted a lift to her van. In view of your comment that ED described people she/they met is it odd that she doesn't do so with the mystery hiker. Also no photo of him, or did he decline.

I have looked way back through her posts and she frequently has unnamed "locals" or "new friends" who show her something or help her out, no names.

If someone offers to take a picture of someone else, using that other person's camera, it is rare indeed to see an exchange of pictures. Both DH and I have taken countless pictures of others while they were on vacation and not once has anyone wanted a picture of us (why would they?) Nor would we pose for it nor would we give our names.

I see absolutely no pictures of random travelers on the E-D FB page. It's dogs, scenery and themselves. In fact, the only person I can see who is mentioned besides ED and DC is someone who is involved in the release or writing of Esther's children's books.

I don't find it odd at all that there's no picture or name of some hiker who took a picture of Esther.
 
The report re the van also comments that DC's father has now joined him. So he now has some personal care and support rather than wandering around by himself. I wonder whose looking after the dogs.
 
I have looked way back through her posts and she frequently has unnamed "locals" or "new friends" who show her something or help her out, no names.

If someone offers to take a picture of someone else, using that other person's camera, it is rare indeed to see an exchange of pictures. Both DH and I have taken countless pictures of others while they were on vacation and not once has anyone wanted a picture of us (why would they?) Nor would we pose for it nor would we give our names.

I see absolutely no pictures of random travelers on the E-D FB page. It's dogs, scenery and themselves. In fact, the only person I can see who is mentioned besides ED and DC is someone who is involved in the release or writing of Esther's children's books.
It's a big privacy of course. I sometimes feel uncomfortable being included in strangers photos when in a public place. Never sure what that person intends to do with them.

I don't find it odd at all that there's no picture or name of some hiker who took a picture of Esther.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
132
Total visitors
213

Forum statistics

Threads
608,561
Messages
18,241,322
Members
234,401
Latest member
CRIM1959
Back
Top