WA WA - Shantina Smiley, 29, & Azriel Carver, 8 (fnd deceased), Olympia, Mar 2010 - #6

[SMK]

I know what you're saying, SMK. I'm just recapping what the latest is that LE has said. We have to have a factual, credible basis or premise to start from for our sleuthing. I was just listing the basics of what we have right now.

In this particular matter, some will see Chamberlain's statements as a change, some won't, and some will probably see it somewhere in between.

Let the sleuthin' continue!

Yes, thanks!!:innocent:

 

[Calliope]

But with all due respect, she DID kill Azriel. Her senseless, rambling actions brought that boy to his death either through gross negligence or something more sinister.

"Mommy hit her head". IF she was having a 'brain event', severe migraine or other physical problem, would you still feel this way?

And the things I read do allow for the possibility that she was not saintly.

I never said she was a saint, nor have I heard anyone else call her 'saintly'. I am convinced she loved Azriel and would never intentionally harm him.

While the boyfriend was arrested for breaking Azriel's arm, he wasn't prosecuted since they weren't sure if Shantina or the BF broke it.

I'm sure you have a source for that? I read he wasn't prosecuted for lack of evidence, but not that they suspected SHE may have done this.

The many calls to CPS, the drinking, and the biff to the head in the store that very night tell me things weren't peachy keen in that relationship.

Until CPS releases its review, the only one we know of that was deemed to be actionable against SS was when she passed out drunk while he was in her care. I've already address the "many" calls to CPS and why I take that with a grain of salt. From all accounts she voluntarily gave him up while she was in rehab / treatment, and hasn't had an issue since.

I agree, no way was she lost. But why would she rendezvous with someone with her child in tow? He could rat her out! You can't trust an 8 yr old to keep secrets. And why that place? There's no way she just happened across that road by chance. She had to have been there before.

Or someone had.

We know she had serious issues with alcohol. We witness her buying a large jug of wine, later found half empty. I think the only brain event she had was called intoxication. IMO she was drunk. I think the wine wasn't the only thing she drank that night. Her behavior was off the wall before she even bought it. I don't care if she wanted to get trashed-I just care that she did it with her son, while driving, and endangered his life.

She worked that day, getting off around 2pm (per her comment on CK's FB page telling when to expect the two of them). Not likely she was drunk at work, particularly in a job where she had interviews and a possible job offer two days after she went missing. NO one described her as intoxicated or smelling of alcohol. You said yourself you don't feel she just happened upon that road; have you seen the photos? Do you think she could have navigated that steep, narrow drive in total darkness (new moon that night, IIRC) if she was "trashed"? Hell, if I was stone-cold sober, I guarantee you under those conditions my car would have leaves and twigs all over it. I have my own theory about the wine and bottle, but I'll concede she could have been drinking after she bought it... I don't think she was "trashed" however.

 

[SMK]

"Mommy hit her head". IF she was having a 'brain event', severe migraine or other physical problem, would you still feel this way?

I never said she was a saint, nor have I heard anyone else call her 'saintly'. I am convinced she loved Azriel and would never intentionally harm him.

I'm sure you have a source for that? I read he wasn't prosecuted for lack of evidence, but not that they suspected SHE may have done this.


Until CPS releases its review, the only one we know of that was deemed to be actionable against SS was when she passed out drunk while he was in her care. I've already address the "many" calls to CPS and why I take that with a grain of salt. From all accounts she voluntarily gave him up while she was in rehab / treatment, and hasn't had an issue since.

Or someone had.


She worked that day, getting off around 2pm (per her comment on CK's FB page telling when to expect the two of them). Not likely she was drunk at work, particularly in a job where she had interviews and a possible job offer two days after she went missing. NO one described her as intoxicated or smelling of alcohol. You said yourself you don't feel she just happened upon that road; have you seen the photos? Do you think she could have navigated that steep, narrow drive in total darkness (new moon that night, IIRC) if she was "trashed"? Hell, if I was stone-cold sober, I guarantee you under those conditions my car would have leaves and twigs all over it. I have my own theory about the wine and bottle, but I'll concede she could have been drinking after she bought it... I don't think she was "trashed" however.

Thanks for all of this, Calliope; It is a very fair and thorough analysis, to my thinking. I do not view SS as a saint, but as a very flawed human being - as many of us are, and the 20s, if one has had a traumatic past, are still in the beginning, tottering, stages - but I cannot see her as disconnected from her child, as in say, the cases of Susan Smith and Casey Anthony. Of course I could be wrong, and then my feelings for her would change dramatically, but that is an IF/When situation. In the meantime, I believe she met with something untoward, and that she and her boy paid with their lives.

 

[Calliope]

I think what is problematic, is that the falling asleep, being surprised by ferocious high tides, was changed when Chief Deputy Chamberlain said he cannot see those items as being washed ashore, because of their close proximity to each other, but dropped or left there. It seems to negate Mealy's original theory. If not for the items, I would still think the falling asleep held true. Just thinking out loud...

Even without the items, I don't buy that they were somehow washed out of the van or away from it. I don't believe the water would rise that fast (drunk or not, that near freezing water would have awakened them and fast) or that any current that close to shore would be so strong as to prevent them from simply wading out.

 

[Calliope]

I know what you're saying, SMK. I'm just recapping what the latest is that LE has said. We have to have a factual, credible basis or premise to start from for our sleuthing. I was just listing the basics of what we have right now.

In this particular matter, some will see Chamberlain's statements as a change, some won't, and some will probably see it somewhere in between.

Let the sleuthin' continue!

I know you lean toward some sort of 'brain event', and it certainly would explain all the bizarre behaviour she exhibited, but IF LE thinks there may be a third party somehow involved, I wondered if perhaps Chamberlain isn't coming out with this now hoping to make them slip up.

 

[Calliope]

Thanks for all of this, Calliope; It is a very fair and thorough analysis, to my thinking. I do not view SS as a saint, but as a very flawed human being - as many of us are, and the 20s, if one has had a traumatic past, are still in the beginning, tottering, stages - but I cannot see her as disconnected from her child, as in say, the cases of Susan Smith and Casey Anthony. Of course I could be wrong, and then my feelings for her would change dramatically, but that is an IF/When situation. In the meantime, I believe she met with something untoward, and that she and her boy paid with their lives.

I doubt there are many of us who didn't screw up majorly at some point in our teens / 20s. When I think back on how it was with my kids (I was a mom at 18, and the so-called marriage didn't last but a couple of years), it's a wonder any of us survived lol. But we managed and muddled through. Gah, I was clueless and naive ... still am in some respects

 

[BeanE]

I know you lean toward some sort of 'brain event', and it certainly would explain all the bizarre behaviour she exhibited, but IF LE thinks there may be a third party somehow involved, I wondered if perhaps Chamberlain isn't coming out with this now hoping to make them slip up.

My head won't go there because I haven't seen LE give any indication that a third party was involved, nor do I see any from my own perusal of the case. I can take a step without a reasonably sure footing - it's just the way I'm wired. Three steps is definitely two too many - for me.

 

[SMK]

I know you lean toward some sort of 'brain event', and it certainly would explain all the bizarre behaviour she exhibited, but IF LE thinks there may be a third party somehow involved, I wondered if perhaps Chamberlain isn't coming out with this now hoping to make them slip up.

Certainly, his statements in the Examiner piece, would give anyone stern pause. He was stating his own surmising regarding the oddity of the position of the items, and a lot more was there within the statement, IMO.:waitasec:

 

[SMK]

My head won't go there because I haven't seen LE give any indication that a third party was involved, nor do I see any from my own perusal of the case. I can take a step without a reasonably sure footing - it's just the way I'm wired. Three steps is definitely two too many - for me.

I think it is good to err on the side of caution. I am wired in a way that makes me go with intuition, but admittedly, when one makes a mistake with that, it is usually a big one. I wish more could come out about this case, so that LE could answer more questions. Guess we will simply have to wait, and see what, if anything, unfolds in time....

 

[SMK]

I doubt there are many of us who didn't screw up majorly at some point in our teens / 20s. When I think back on how it was with my kids (I was a mom at 18, and the so-called marriage didn't last but a couple of years), it's a wonder any of us survived lol. But we managed and muddled through. Gah, I was clueless and naive ... still am in some respects

Yes, I think this may be why a few of us have a tender feeling about Shantina (and her adorable child): She had been thrown into a scenario from childhood which she never made, had muddled through, with tons of problems and mistakes, but seemed to be trying so, so hard, to get clear of it, and to do right by her child and herself. (As many of us, by the grace of God, were able to do). Many can identify with that, and feel sorry for the way it wound up, I think...Or at least I do....

 

[lilcatt]

Good morning,
If she did kill Az and take off with someone, then everything she did that night was to set up an insanty defence in case she is ever caught.

 

[Calliope]

My head won't go there because I haven't seen LE give any indication that a third party was involved, nor do I see any from my own perusal of the case. I can take a step without a reasonably sure footing - it's just the way I'm wired. Three steps is definitely two too many - for me.

Understood, but from all you've read about on this board, you know that more often than not LE won't tip their hand. I don't have proof, just a gut feeling they are digging deeper than we may suspect.

 

[Calliope]

Yes, I think this may be why a few of us have a tender feeling about Shantina (and her adorable child): She had been thrown into a scenario from childhood which she never made, had muddled through, with tons of problems and mistakes, but seemed to be trying so, so hard, to get clear of it, and to do right by her child and herself. (As many of us, by the grace of God, were able to do). Many can identify with that, and feel sorry for the way it wound up, I think...Or at least I do....

That's the crux of it, IMO. By all accounts she had put her life on a good track and was trying so hard to make it work (given her past, it's no wonder she was screwed up for a while) and I just can't see her making such a sudden 180 degree turn, all in a period of two hours. Something happened between 5 and 7 pm that evening that caused her to start behaving completely out of character.

 

[TGIRecovered]

Predators find their victims by watching for those who are young, lost, injured or impared. I don't know what happened to this mom and her son, but I believe that they were prime candidates for becoming easy prey.

Alcoholism and other addictions can cause smart, responsible people to make stupid, desperate choices. It is only by God's grace and with His protection that I sit here today, sober and repulsed by the thought of ever drinking again. I am sorry that Shantina didn't achieve a full recovery in time to avoid whatever tragedy, (accidental or foul play), has befallen her and her son. Many of us could have easily been in her place.

For anyone still struggling to get clean and sober- never give up, don't give in, because you can be healthy and normal again! It feels so good to not have to be slave to the next drink or drug and it is so totally worth all of your blood, sweat and tears to get there!

 

[marcyjoy]

A motorcycle trip took me through Brinnon yesterday and I thought of Shantina.....still hoping she's found soon...

 

[houndstooth]

Consider where the van was found. She HAD to go through the moves with much fanfare of rattling of maps and asking of directions to appear to have been lost. She couldn't just be found at the spot without leaving a trail of eyewitnesses to SAY she seemed lost. But there is no way that was the case. She could not just drive there and have it be found because without those accounts, then LE would be asking very different questions. Why is she in a store buying wine like that in where it for sure would be remembered and captured on video. Then when it is found, half empty then a certain desired conclusion is drawn. And it is found. Purposefully placed where it would be most likely to be found......at the entrance way stairs onto the beach.

This is the set-up. A stranger would not have thought out such a thing would not know about her having bought it on video and not in an anonymous grocery store. He would not have thought to set up the shoes, balls and inhaler. He would have done the deed right there and just left the scene not bothering with staging another scene. Only the person who thought there was a possibility that Az might be found eventually would do so. Her shoe needed to be found near his in order for people (LE) to draw the same conclusion about her. The bottle of wine likewise HAD to be found. Otherwise people would not think "oh, she drank half the bottle she was drunk". No bottle-no evidence.

This is a very suspicious case to me. While there is no direct physical evidence of a third party the fact she is no where around there, did not simply walk out by herself, points to her having been picked up prearranged by someone.

 

[SMK]

Consider where the van was found. She HAD to go through the moves with much fanfare of rattling of maps and asking of directions to appear to have been lost. She couldn't just be found at the spot without leaving a trail of eyewitnesses to SAY she seemed lost. But there is no way that was the case. She could not just drive there and have it be found because without those accounts, then LE would be asking very different questions. Why is she in a store buying wine like that in where it for sure would be remembered and captured on video. Then when it is found, half empty then a certain desired conclusion is drawn. And it is found. Purposefully placed where it would be most likely to be found......at the entrance way stairs onto the beach.

This is the set-up. A stranger would not have thought out such a thing would not know about her having bought it on video and not in an anonymous grocery store. He would not have thought to set up the shoes, balls and inhaler. He would have done the deed right there and just left the scene not bothering with staging another scene. Only the person who thought there was a possibility that Az might be found eventually would do so. Her shoe needed to be found near his in order for people (LE) to draw the same conclusion about her. The bottle of wine likewise HAD to be found. Otherwise people would not think "oh, she drank half the bottle she was drunk". No bottle-no evidence.

This is a very suspicious case to me. While there is no direct physical evidence of a third party the fact she is no where around there, did not simply walk out by herself, points to her having been picked up prearranged by someone.

I would agree that someone had to have staged this, set it up. The question remains if it was SS or another, and I am hoping it was not SS. The other question is, how far in advance? Hours, weeks, or what? I cannot imagine that LE - despite the standard claims of "no foul play" - is not drawing similar conclusions. Also: Was Azriel's death really intended? Or an unintended and unforseen consequence? Snipped by SMK from Calliope post above:
By all accounts she had put her life on a good track and was trying so hard to make it work (given her past, it's no wonder she was screwed up for a while) and I just can't see her making such a sudden 180 degree turn, all in a period of two hours. Something happened between 5 and 7 pm that evening that caused her to start behaving completely out of character.

 

[houndstooth]

I would agree that someone had to have staged this, set it up. The question remains if it was SS or another, and I am hoping it was not SS. The other question is, how far in advance? Hours, weeks, or what? I cannot imagine that LE - despite the standard claims of "no foul play" - is not drawing similar conclusions. Also: Was Azriel's death really intended? Or an unintended and unforseen consequence? Snipped by SMK from Calliope post above:
By all accounts she had put her life on a good track and was trying so hard to make it work (given her past, it's no wonder she was screwed up for a while) and I just can't see her making such a sudden 180 degree turn, all in a period of two hours. Something happened between 5 and 7 pm that evening that caused her to start behaving completely out of character.

Every action of hers from the leaving of cell phone behind to the finding of the staged evidence on the beach speak to her active involvement. There is no other conclusion to be drawn. I would say she has been contemplating it for awhile. Did a trial run of area two weeks ahead of time.

What is the alternative you have in mind that does not involve her?

 

[slowpoke]

I think I' must be way behind most of you--I'm not following the trains of thought here! So, sorry if I am taking you all a step back as I try to get up to speed:

I'm still back at the new report of Chamberlain's comments. If it is true that SS and AZ "walked down the beach and that they had the items with them", as Chamberlain has been quoted to say, I find it very strange that of items to bring along those did not include the van keys and SS's wallet (which were found in the van). What, then, would be SS's reasoning for that?

 

[SMK]

I think I' must be way behind most of you--I'm not following the trains of thought here! So, sorry if I am taking you all a step back as I try to get up to speed:

I'm still back at the new report of Chamberlain's comments. If it is true that SS and AZ "walked down the beach and that they had the items with them", as Chamberlain has been quoted to say, I find it very strange that of items to bring along those did not include the van keys and SS's wallet (which were found in the van). What, then, would be SS's reasoning for that?

That is a very good question......