I haven't written on this forum for a long long time, but I have followed all your posts guys on this case since day one. I have a few thoughts to share so bare with me
WHAT IS THE MOTIVE? WHAT WAS THE BOILING REASON?
This fast move back to Washington and plans to sell the house (if true) not only reminds me of Scott Peterson selling Laci's car soon after her dissappearance BUT .... it could also be an indication of what was actually the MOTIVE that resulted in Susan's disappearance if Josh is the responsible party (and I believe he is). Did Josh desired to move back to Washington and believed Susan would never follow him and he knew he couldn't do this without leaving his sons back? Did he even ask her for such a possibility and she said no? There is always a motive, a reason. In all the similar cases we have followed in recent years for me it is not as much WHY any sociopath husband/wife will do this or any suspect will do this BUT WHY NOW? WHY AT THAT SPECIFIC POINT? Why this happened NOW? There is always something the suspect WANTED and the VICTIM was in the way of that. Scott Peterson could have easily gotten a divorce but that would have messed up with his plans for a carefree life without having to pay child support or all the funds and the privileged life he felt so entitled for. Mark Hacking lied to his family and wife about attending University. A lie coming out. In other cases the SUSPECT doesn't want the wife to move on with her life perhaps with a new boyfriend, or share custody, or he doesn't want a secret coming out, or or or. There is always a reason for them why divorce is not a good option and in their mind the victim is in the way of getting what they want to get.
And I wonder... plans to sell the house is giving us a clue to what the motive might have been behind Susan's disappearance if Josh is responsible for it? Hm let's see Josh!!! If Susan comes back where is she going to live? Back with your father if you actually sell your house? Her job is in Utah, her friends are here, the children's school is here, her church is here. If Susan was here right now would they be moving with Josh's father? NO!!! Leave alone the fact that Josh can't stay home and pretend he is by the phone waiting for his wife's call or some tip. He runs back to his father's nest. His lawyer will say Josh needed the support system of his family during this hard times. And I am sure the house selling plan will not go forward after his lawyer's strong advice because that is a hard thing to explain to jurors. But if it is true there are such thoughts to sell the house, it does speak volumes not only to what might have happened to Susan and that at least Josh is not expecting her to come back alive but also to the fact that Josh seems pretty ready to make this decision to make a move - a permanent one if you are selling your house. Was this idea festing for a long time in his mind? Did he ask Susan that night for such a possibility and she said no? I can't help but wonder...Susan was enjoying due to her character and hard work a successful climb in the social and professional ladder whilst Josh was going exactly the opposite way for the exactly opposite reasons. A very controlling spouse - according to friend's info and the media - isn't this a move a controlling spouce will do? Remove you from the environment you thrive and to an environment he felt he was in control? A place where where Susan would have to start from the beginning in terms of social and professional life? A place where nobody would knew Josh shortcomings? Isn't this the fantasy more or less Scott played with Amber? An uprooting that will cause interference with Susan's ability to set aside some of the money she so hard earned?
I will not be surprised that the police are asking everyone right now if Josh talked about any plans he had to move back at Washington, telling perhaps people he found a good job there or whatever BEFORE Susan disappeared. Or ask Susan's friends if Susan told them that Josh had discussed about such a possibility.
JOSH'S FATHER:
As for his father, I don't have any indications or suspicions right now if he had anything to do with this. The police will find out if that was the case or not. Based on the info out there in the media and going by my own values and standards I have one personal thought though about Josh's father: he had no value or respect for Susan and Josh and Susan's marriage and family as an independent unit. Because there are plenty of in-laws out there who don't like their son's wife, her choices, her job, her political views, her religious views, her background, her family, the way she speaks to them, and all that, but THEY NEVER SAY ANYTHING because they know the balance is so thin in any family and can so easily be disturbed and they don't want to cause any trouble. GOOD parents-in-law who care about their son and their grandchildren RESPECT their son's family and his wife and don't bombard them with information about how bad the LDS church is, Susan's chosen religion. Susan is a beautiful, young, hardworking, devoted mother and wife, a wonderful friend who is loved and respected and cared for and was active in her community and giving back to her community. What a bad daughter in law to have right? It seems Josh father had a real obsession with Susan's religion choice. An obsession so strong that it overpassed all the wonderful things Susan is. It makes you wonder if someone can overpass all the wonderful things Susan is only based on your obsession about her chosen religion, how much value do you place on her life and well-being? My guess wouldn't be too much. Josh's father had one war to fight: Let his son know how bad the LDS church was (according to the media). It makes you wonder how controlling this grandfather was if he kept sending material and talking about the LDS church, knowing that this would divide this couple. Is control a shared trait between father and son? The grandfather certainly seems to have had no respect for Susan or her family if it is true that he constantly drilled Josh about Susan's religion. It was all about HIM and HIS son and HIS views about the LDS church. Did Josh do the same? Was it all about HIM and HIS SONS? Finding a way to get what he wanted - being back with his father in a new environment where nobody knew his shortcomings with his sons without Susan interfering with this?
POISONED DINNER?
I don't think Josh poisoned his wife during that dinner the neighbour attended. I think the dinner HAD THE PURPOSE OF MAKING his wife safe and calm so he could attack her later and the neighbour watching him being an attentive husband was only a bonus for him as she later vouched for what a sweet husband he was during that dinner. Is a husband making some easy dinner for a wife such a suspicious thing? Of course not ... only that we know from friends and media it was not Josh's usual routine so much that Susan drew attention to the fact how nice he was being to her. Bringing also a blanket out because she was cold --- but remember that incident when Susan was really ill and she had her neighbour come home and give her a blessing to help her feel better? Remember how Josh reacted when their son started re-enacting the whole thing, laughing while Susan was embarrased and ill? Hardly the picture of a compassionate partner when his wife is feeling ill. So it is not such a big deal that he threw some eggs and a blanket to her but it is rather suspicious that it was not his usual ROUTINE of caring and doing things AND COINCIDENCE COINCIDENCE it happened the same night Susan disappeared. He might have poisoned her later but I don't think at that point when the neighbour was present he would risk having Susan perhaps being violently ill from poison or acting strange due to some sleeping pills, going perhaps to hospital with the neighbour's assistance and finding out she was poisoned. I think if he did something to her that night he did it later. The dinner was a dinner to keep her calm and feeling safe around him and UNSUSPECTED of anything that was going to happen later. Perhaps later he might have offered her a nice tea with something in it. Or as she layed unsuspected in bed he did something to her. But not during the dinner. JMO
DO WE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT NOT WANTING THE KIDS TO BE MEMBERS OF THE LDS CHURCH?
If the grandfather was indeed so adamant in his efforts about informing Josh about all the bad things the LDS church was, I wonder if there were also any discussions about the upbringing of Susan's two boys? Perhaps the grandfather advising Josh that he would have to ''save'' his sons from the ''brainwashing'' now they were still very young? A divorce definitely wouldn't solve this problem. Do we know anything from Susan's friends about Josh's views regarding his sons upbringing in terms of religion matters? Do I remember correctly there were instances Josh encouraged the boys not to attend Sunday church?
THANKS FOR READING GUYS. YOU ARE ALL DOING A WONDERFUL JOB HELPING SUSAN, HER FAMILY AND HER FRIENDS WHO LOVE HER