Found Deceased WY - Gabby Petito, Grand Teton National Park #88

[MyBelle]

That could also be what the Laundries thought happened when BL called and said that Gabby was gone.

The idea they immediately thought that BL had killed her doesn't make sense to me. JMO.

Nor to me. They bought the van together and fixed it up together. What we don't know is whether Gabby had a history of leaving abruptly when she lived in their home. She told Moab LE that she had OCD. We don't know if she was taking any medication or how she had learned to cope with it.

JMO

 

[Trooper]

Probably chemically Gatorade type drink.

If they actually believed lies, at a minimum BL taking her van back to his parents left Gabby out there somewhere, homeless.

a horrible fate, don't you think, Box? all of Gabby;s stuff was in the van. No. They knew. The Laundrie';s knew, and what is more, they made such bad decisions , cumulatively, one bad one after another. Which is why the Laundrie's are where they are. No one made them do it, It was all their own idea.

 

[MyBelle]

Probably chemically Gatorade type drink.

If they actually believed lies, at a minimum BL taking her van back to his parents left Gabby out there somewhere, homeless.

According to Gabby's mother, it was their van.

JMO

Would Gabby Petito be alive today if warning signs of domestic violence had been acted on earlier?

Gabby Petito, 22, died at the hands of her fiancé, Brian Laundrie. Now, her parents are asking if her murder could have been prevented, and hope others can be saved by learning her story.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Trooper]

Was Brians name on the registration papers?

Next thing, Brian owned Gabby;s credit card, I can see that coming up.

 

[Boxer]

a horrible fate, don't you think, Box? all of Gabby;s stuff was in the van. No. They knew. The Laundrie';s knew, and what is more, they made such bad decisions , cumulatively, one bad one after another. Which is why the Laundrie's are where they are. No one made them do it, It was all their own idea.

Frantic phone calls to his parents.
Gabbys gone, I need a lawyer.

 

[Sillybilly]

Thread is closed for the night.

Check back in the morning.

 

[Knitty]

Thread is open.

 

[Sundog]

The Laundries should never, ever have issued that letter stating their hopes about Gabby''s situation. That was deceptive.

<snipped for focus>

The Laundries were ill-served, IMO, by their attorney who chose to release the statement in the way that he did. I think they trusted his judgement on what to write and release in his statement.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Does anyone have a resource, article, or essay that can help those of us that are not lawyers understand better what is going on? As in the difference between civil and criminal, and when/how they affect each other.

What I will mention, and this is very important to understand, is that in the United States, one major difference between criminal law and civil law is this:

In order to be found guilty of a crime it has to be beyond a reasonable doubt. For civil law it only needs to be proved that the offense being litigated over is most likely to have occurred; it does not need to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Depending on the state you live in pleading the 5th in a civil matter can be used against you.

When discussing this specific litigation, the Petitos only need to prove that it was more likely than not that the Laundries knew Brian murdered Gabby Petito. I get the impression they have proved this.

They need to prove much more than that. They have to prove that: (1) the defendant engaged in intentional or reckless conduct; (2) the conduct was "outrageous"; (3) the conduct caused emotional distress; and (4) the emotional distress was severe.

IMO, I haven't seen enough evidence that proves any of those elements. And reading through the depositions, I am seeing evidence against all of it, especially from Joseph Petito, like this section:

16 Q Okay. lf the September 14th statement is not
17 written but the Laundries don't do any of that -- it's
18 just the September 14th statement is not written, but
19 they're still not talking, they're not helping, they're
20 not pointing out what they know -- does that make it any
21 better?
22 A I don't think it makes it any worse, but it
23 definitely didn't make it any better.

That goes against an argument that the Laundries' statement was damaging to them, since he's saying it wouldn't have been any better if they said nothing.

He also says many times he never believed the Laundries didn't know anything, that he thought they were lying as soon as he learned of the statement, so it's not like they were relying on the statement and only later were shocked to find out it was a lie (if it was even a lie).

He also seems to think that the Laundries had some kind of power to haul adult Brian into the police station and have him arrested. They didn't have that power. If there were grounds to arrest Brian, that was up to LE to act on it. (To me, there was enough circumstantial evidence the moment he showed up in Florida in the van alone to haul him in, but that just may be my true-crime-watcher bias.)

And to me, there is no convincing proof in any public document yet that shows the Laundries knew for sure Brian killed Gabby. And it's a bigger leap to insist that they would have known where the body is. Even if Brian confessed to them, that hardly would mean he also gave them the gps coordinates to the body. I haven't found anything in their depositions that like trips them up to prove they knew more than what they are saying.

I also have a problem believing anything the Laundries did caused emotional distress that could be called severe. I see a lot of anger coming from JP over what the Laundries did and didn't do, but I don't see how it caused severe emotional distress beyond simple anger or offense. The murder of their daughter certainly has caused severe distress, but the parents aren't responsible for the murder.

I also don't see that the Laundries behavior qualifies as outrageous, which is defined as:

• Liability has been found only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Generally, the case is one in which the recitation of the facts to an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the action, and leave him to exclaim, "Outrageous!"

I don't think it's outrageous in that sense to keep quiet and not try to help the plaintiffs and LE prosecute their son. It may be unseemly and unethical and dishonorable, but it is still understandable enough why they wouldn't. moo

 

[MyBelle]

<snipped for focus>

The Laundries were ill-served, IMO, by their attorney who chose to release the statement in the way that he did. I think they trusted his judgement on what to write and release in his statement.

iirc, at the time of their attorney's statement the Laundrie's and their Florida home were being harassed by "protestors" with signs and bullhorns to the point LE had to disperse them.

JMO

 

[housewife]

That they got in a fight and she escaped. JMO.

"Escaped".
That word is very telling.
From who or what was Gabby escaping? Brian was the only person with her.
Sounds like she needed to escape from him.

 

[MyBelle]

They need to prove much more than that. They have to prove that: (1) the defendant engaged in intentional or reckless conduct; (2) the conduct was "outrageous"; (3) the conduct caused emotional distress; and (4) the emotional distress was severe.

IMO, I haven't seen enough evidence that proves any of those elements. And reading through the depositions, I am seeing evidence against all of it, especially from Joseph Petito, like this section:

16 Q Okay. lf the September 14th statement is not
17 written but the Laundries don't do any of that -- it's
18 just the September 14th statement is not written, but
19 they're still not talking, they're not helping, they're
20 not pointing out what they know -- does that make it any
21 better?
22 A I don't think it makes it any worse, but it
23 definitely didn't make it any better.

That goes against an argument that the Laundries' statement was damaging to them, since he's saying it wouldn't have been any better if they said nothing.

He also says many times he never believed the Laundries didn't know anything, that he thought they were lying as soon as he learned of the statement, so it's not like they were relying on the statement and only later were shocked to find out it was a lie (if it was even a lie).

He also seems to think that the Laundries had some kind of power to haul adult Brian into the police station and have him arrested. They didn't have that power. If there were grounds to arrest Brian, that was up to LE to act on it. (To me, there was enough circumstantial evidence the moment he showed up in Florida in the van alone to haul him in, but that just may be my true-crime-watcher bias.)

And to me, there is no convincing proof in any public document yet that shows the Laundries knew for sure Brian killed Gabby. And it's a bigger leap to insist that they would have known where the body is. Even if Brian confessed to them, that hardly would mean he also gave them the gps coordinates to the body. I haven't found anything in their depositions that like trips them up to prove they knew more than what they are saying.

I also have a problem believing anything the Laundries did caused emotional distress that could be called severe. I see a lot of anger coming from JP over what the Laundries did and didn't do, but I don't see how it caused severe emotional distress beyond simple anger or offense. The murder of their daughter certainly has caused severe distress, but the parents aren't responsible for the murder.

I also don't see that the Laundries behavior qualifies as outrageous, which is defined as:

• Liability has been found only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Generally, the case is one in which the recitation of the facts to an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the action, and leave him to exclaim, "Outrageous!"

I don't think it's outrageous in that sense to keep quiet and not try to help the plaintiffs and LE prosecute their son. It may be unseemly and unethical and dishonorable, but it is still understandable enough why they wouldn't. moo

BBM. You raise the same points I've been wondering about.

Reading attorney Bertolino's deposition answered a lot of them. For example, the Laundries didn't know anything beyond Brian's words that she was "gone" and that he needed an attorney. So, Chris Laundrie called their long-time friend and former neighbor, Steve Bertolino. He told them not to ask Brian any questions and not discuss anything with their daughter. Bertolino told them Brian should stay in Wyoming and that's why he immediately contacted Wyoming attorneys. When the Laundries told him Brian was driving home, he told them to have Brian immediately call him and they couldn't listen to their conversation.

Bertolino stated that GP's parents and their attorney instigated the massive protests with bullhorns and the media in front of the Laundrie home by intentionally giving the press and local police misinformation such as it was only Gabby's van. He pointed out that he had seen the Discovery text messages where GP's parents were "gloating about it."

The hoard of protestors and press outside their home continued to the point the Laundrie parents and the attorney and his children were receiving death threats. Evidently GP's parents smirked at him at this point during the deposition because he mentioned it.

He said he had a legal obligation to protect his clients and he did so. He also pointed out that Joe Petito had never met the Laundries, yet he went on national television and called them "horrible people" who shouldn't be allowed to check out a library book.

He points out that the day of the Moab incident, Gabby talked to both of her parents about the possibility she would be arrested yet her parents never contacted Brian's parents to discuss whether the parents needed to intervene.

JMO
Deposition (150+ pgs.) is linked in this story:

Former Laundrie attorney defends actions, notes that Roberta Laundrie could have faced arrest

In the depositions released earlier this week in the civil trial against the parents of Brian Laundrie, Steven Bertolino defended his actions in the days following Gabby Petito’s disappearance.

www.mysuncoast.com

 

[girlhasnoname]

That could also be what the Laundries thought happened when BL called and said that Gabby was gone.

The idea they immediately thought that BL had killed her doesn't make sense to me. JMO.

The phone call also said "Gabby's gone, I need a lawyer". Why would BL need a lawyer if Gabby willingly walked off and there was no harm, no foul?

It could have been because he was driving home without her, pretending to be Gabby in the text about her grandfather to Gabby's mom, in a van registered to Gabby and also using Gabby's credit cards without her permission since she was 'gone'. Very suspicious behavior for a worried or concerned fiancé.

JMO

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

For me, it all comes back to the fact that Bertolino was in over his head with this and didn't do right by his clients. He should have handed this off to someone who had more experience in this area.

 

[al66pine]

Post, in its entirety, by @Sundog:
"The Laundries were ill-served, IMO, by their attorney who chose to release the statement in the way that he did. I think they trusted his judgement on what to write and release in his statement."

This ^ post is included in post below by @MyBelle.

iirc, at the time of their attorney's statement the Laundrie's and their Florida home were being harassed by "protestors" with signs and bullhorns to the point LE had to disperse them. JMO

@MyBelle
Tho understanding that some ppl "protested" at or close to the Laundrie home (I don't recall details), I'm not following the gist of the post.

Is ^post saying that the L's atty's publicly released stmt at that time was the (or an) appropriate way to address the circumstances, i.e., to prevent ppl from "protesting?"
Or to address something else?

ETA. TYVM for link to depo of Bertolino
Now starting to read it for more context & timing re the publicly released stmt & the protests. May clarify the issue.
Deposition (150+ pgs.) is linked in this story:

Former Laundrie attorney defends actions, notes that Roberta Laundrie could have faced arrest

In the depositions released earlier this week in the civil trial against the parents of Brian Laundrie, Steven Bertolino defended his actions in the days following Gabby Petito’s disappearance.

www.mysuncoast.com

 

[RANCH]

The phone call also said "Gabby's gone, I need a lawyer". Why would BL need a lawyer if Gabby willingly walked off and there was no harm, no foul?

It could have been because he was driving home without her, pretending to be Gabby in the text about her grandfather to Gabby's mom, in a van registered to Gabby and also using Gabby's credit cards without her permission since she was 'gone'. Very suspicious behavior for a worried or concerned fiancé.

JMO

Attorneys then pushed Roberta Laundrie on why Brian saying, “She’s gone. Call a lawyer,” didn’t raise alarm bells.

“A lot of things ran through my head. Possibly they got in a fight, and you know, maybe she’s going to press charges against him or something? I didn’t know,” she responded.

I've long thought that this is a logical reason for why the Laundries contacted a lawyer. RL's statement above gives credence to that scenario.

Brian Laundrie’s mother insists she didn’t know Gabby Petito was dead, court docs say

When asked what she understood the word “gone” to mean, Roberta Laundrie replied, “I wasn’t sure. I didn’t even - I don’t even remember what I thought.”

www.wwnytv.com

 

[MyBelle]

For me, it all comes back to the fact that Bertolino was in over his head with this and didn't do right by his clients. He should have handed this off to someone who had more experience in this area.

Apparently you didn't read Bertolino's deposition I linked upthread.

JMO

 

[Lawnguylander1964]

I did read it. I stand by my opinion.

 

[MyBelle]

I've long thought that this is a logical reason for why the Laundries contacted a lawyer. RL's statement above gives credence to that scenario.

Brian Laundrie’s mother insists she didn’t know Gabby Petito was dead, court docs say

When asked what she understood the word “gone” to mean, Roberta Laundrie replied, “I wasn’t sure. I didn’t even - I don’t even remember what I thought.”

www.wwnytv.com

"Possibly they got in a fight, and you know, maybe she’s going to press charges against him."

Interesting! Based on RL's comment, I think it is likely the couple had a history of arguments that included hitting one another. RL would know because they lived with the Laundries. Also sounds like RL wasn't aware of the Moab LE encounter.

One thing that really popped out while reading Bertolino's depo is that Gabby's parents never called them about the Moab incident. That day, Gabby spoke to both her parents about the possibility she would be arrested, including a 45-minute conversation with Joe Petito.

JMO

 

[Trooper]

Brian Laundrie's Father's Deposition Released

Christopher Laundrie detailed a chilling phone call with his son which reveals new details in the death of Gabby Petito.

www.courttv.com

Pretty clear in this that it is commonly known that the van was , in deed, Gabby's. No argument about it at all.

So far, Mr Laundrie is not presenting as someone with a grasp on reality.. . It will be really interesting when Bertolino is cross examined. Bertolino's deposition is full of emotive feels and slurs, bits and pieces of slings and arrows, none of which hit a target, so him on the stand should be informative, to say the least.

Still the same problem haunts the Laundries.. they should not have sent the statement out, hoping for Gabby's return and believing in her safety. This is the stumbling block that the Laundrie's fell into, fell over, and still lie under. They cannot get out from under it.