Guess who would have had to pay the ticket? JMOIt was probably to her immediate benefit that he did not get a ticket, imo. That could only have added to the stressors piling on. But I get your point. It feels unjust.
Guess who would have had to pay the ticket? JMOIt was probably to her immediate benefit that he did not get a ticket, imo. That could only have added to the stressors piling on. But I get your point. It feels unjust.
Remains would suggest he's been in that swamp all along, which in turn would suggest that he didn't flee with money, supplies, food etc to a comfy cabin in the woods somewhere c/o assistance from his parents.
The parents demeanor suggests they've known he was somewhere safe, not somewhere where he was potentially struggling to survive.
They've shown no panic, no grief, no devastation or worry. These would be natural reactions and emotions if your son was truly in a place where he'd be struggling to survive after a couple of days.
I've always said if he IS in the swamp, he won't be found alive, but the very reactions of his parents (or lack thereof) have made me almost certain he's not in there.
MOO
True. But in doing so, they ignored the least biased account of what happened, which was what the person who saw it happening saw and reported to 911 right away, as close as possible to the time when it was happening. LE gave more weight to what a DV and her aggressor said during the stop, and a written account that happened hours later. We know that DV victims and aggressors don't always give accurate accounts. The only person whose account had no real agenda and no time to have memory distortions was the person who called 911. Which we now know was accurately relayed to the officers.
As someone with expertise in memory, it's fascinating to me. The officers unconsciously edited their memory of the dispatch call to conform with the narrative that they jointly constructed, in collaboration with the DV victim and aggressor, at the scene. Aside from being tragic, it's also a fascinating example of the reconstructive nature of memory, and how biases enter narratives about events.
I guess it depends on where you go. If I have ever seen this happen, I can't remember it in a restaurant. In a bar yes, but it's usually drunks and it's handled quickly.
That's true of most places, but it was stated he left and came back in 4 times!Most of the time as long as they can get them to leave, there's no need to call LE. At my place of employment (DMV), we deal with out of control people on a constant basis and if we ask them to leave and they comply there's no need to call anyone.
He is a small man both literally and figuratively. I bet that he never spoke to men like that.
Yep. Agree 100%Was it the tall bearded officer who followed up with this witness who “was not entirely sure what he had seen, but feared the worst?”
I ask because I’d be concerned that this particular officer, whose arrival at the scene IMO totally shifted the dynamic at the scene to align with his own bias, may have influenced this witness just as he worked at influencing GP (telling her she played a role in worsening things by “spiraling” BL’s anxiety) and the officer who had arrived at the scene initially (when he pulled that officer aside to summarize that they were required to identify either GP or BL as perpetrator and that they should choose GP as such based on GP’s and BL’s statements on scene and visible marks on BL, but COMPLETELY ignoring (1) the witness’s call to 911 reporting BL hitting and chasing GP, (2) BL’s speeding and temporarily evading the officer chasing him as he drove, and (3) the obvious size and strength - POWER - differential between the two.
It is notable that the original officer at the scene, when calling to arrange a hotel room for BL (as the decided “victim”) for the night, asked the person he was calling whether it would be possible to arrange that room for GP instead, even though she was the one who’d be cited for DV. He was apparently told that wouldn’t be possible; however, that he asked seems to me to indicate this officer is not sold on the idea that GP was the primary abuser. He may have considered her actions reactive to BL’s.
It is also notable the female officer (ranger) does not appear at the scene to be in concurrence with the conclusion of the other officers. And reports since indicate she was advising GP to recognize she was being mistreated, deserved better, and should get help removing herself from the relationship.
I think tall bearded cop pushed his own agenda on everyone at that scene, thus enabling BL, dismissing GP and potentially contributing to her continued codependency, and completely bypassing his fellow officers’ own intuitions and conclusions. At no time after he stated how he saw things did he ask that fellow officer what he thought. He didn’t want to know.
ETA: On occasions such as this where there is not clarity, there ought to be options besides required citation of one party, including temporary citation and sheltering of both of the persons involved, with social worker counseling outside of the immediate crisis to discern the reality of the relationship dynamics.
It makes me sick to think about how both GP and BL left that encounter, him emboldened and her weakened. And when I consider that she was both living with BL in his parents’ home AND working for them at the juice bar, I think she’d been living with a substantial power differential for a long while.
Yeah, I think digital evidence is going to play a large role. I expect it to show that he did in fact send texts pretending to be Gabby, and he was no where near Wyoming when he sent them.I did think of that as well but hope there will be much circumstantial evidence to support. Part of the sum of it all.
Sorry, I responded matter of factly. I know you didn't say that. I just knew I had read someone suggesting it and I just wanted to throw it out that it likely was DNA for Brian they were collecting and not the parents as it doesn't appear to have been collected that way.Yes, not saying that the DNA is from BL's relatives. I just copied the first part of the text and hoped people would read the whole thing (if they are interested).
Collecting DNA of a missing person is standard procedure.
RSBM.
I felt very strongly while watching the bodycam footage from this stop that the bearded LE officer was leading the first-on-scene LE officer. Lots of "it's your call, I trust you to make the call" comments, but they were all either prefaced by or followed up with "but this is what I'd do" type commentary.
I got the impression that the bearded LE was a senior officer; that the first-on-scene was newer.
Definitely will be some disciplinary action for those officers based on what was relayed by dispatch because of the negative outcome.
LE didn't even bring it up once.
Gross oversight.
I think it's too heavy-handed to say that "they could have saved her life" -- that's a bold, loaded statement that places too much blame on the wrong shoulders -- but the trajectory of what happened next could have definitely been impacted had the claim that BL struck GP been explored while on scene.
I disagree. The situation was very weird and nuanced. You’re seeing it with 20/20 hindsight. They didn’t have that advantage.
Gabby Petito case exposes dark side of ‘van life’
Van life has gained steam amid the pandemic, with young people untethered from office work and looking to travel by car. On Instagram alone, there are 11 million posts tagged #vanlife, many of them featuring young, nubile travellers in front of beautiful scenery. But those in the community are quick to note that the lifestyle isn’t all it’s Instagrammed to be, and that a dangerous underbelly lurks beneath.
The 165cm, 52kg Crump, who mainly travels solo, has endured a number of incidents with creepy men making crude comments and threatening her, leaving her scared for her life. She sleeps with her keys within reach, should she need to make a quick exit.
Other van-lifers note that they are constantly on guard. Sunny Flaherty, 24, who has been on the road with boyfriend Jordan Summerlin, 26, for the past five years, recalled a terrifying incident a few years back. She and a caravan of friends were huddled around a campfire in the Arizona desert when a menacing man approached the group.
Guess who would have had to pay the ticket? JMO
Forget LE, apparently it wasn't even considered serious enough at the time to summon the restaurant manager!
It's been a long time but I have waited tables. And I worked as a hostess while in college. If the manager wasn't involved, it probably wasn't a big deal to the staff. Irritating, of course. Wait staff have a hard job and restaurant patrons can sometimes be jerks. But I do sort of wonder if the witness isn't exaggerating a bit.
JMO
I've found another image on MSM showing the item that was removed from the house from a totally different angle. It rules out pump bottle and sponge IMO as the shape now resembles something else!
I can link/attach an image if Websleuthers so wish, but I think some people are already tired of this line of conversation...
Guess who would have had to pay the ticket? JMO
Hypothetically, if they had followed the law. Someone might be in jail and in need of bond money. And in having to get bond money from a possible parental figure, said parental figure might just insist on separation. There is no downplaying an arrest to a parent, but it is possible it was downplayed in the back of the police cruiser if it was mentioned at all.I'd be interested in hearing what the officers could have done to change the trajectory. When I think about it I can't envision what they could have done that would have stopped GP and BL from reuniting.
That's true of most places, but it was stated he left and came back in 4 times!