Found Deceased WY - Gabrielle ‘Gabby’ Petito, 22, Grand Teton National Park, 25 Aug 2021 #85

[Warwick7]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1540491789014106112

 

[steeltowngirl]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1540491789014106112

There you have it. More of the ever-changing story.
Everything but the truth.

CL and RL are still in CYA mode, unwilling to face the reality that they failed Gabby, Gabby‘s parents, and even their own son. Had they notified and cooperated with authorities from the start, Gabby’s parents may have been spared weeks of anguish in uncertainty. BL would likely be alive and behind bars awaiting due process, rather than having been found dead in a swamp.

Yet here we are, deciphering a notebook from their son and cryptic messages from their lawyer.

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

JMO

 

[MsBetsy]

In some (perhaps all) states, you can sue a person's estate if the offender is also deceased. BL had next to nothing as far as we know. Can you sue the offender's family if the offender is deceased?

Not usually, no. Relatives are not responsible for the deceased family member's debts. There may be exceptions, though. Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

Or why didn’t he just do it beside of her? Makes no sense you know? I think he didn’t realize how much attention it would’ve gotten until he saw the protesters

Maybe he really did want to see his family again. That might be one thing he wasn't lying about. I can imagine him thinking and planning, (in his irrational mind) what he would do while on the drive home. He may have just considered it, and as soon as he knew LE was on to him, made his final decision. He left before protestors arrived, leaving only his family behind to face the wrath.

 

[TL4S]

Maybe he really did want to see his family again. That might be one thing he wasn't lying about. I can imagine him thinking and planning, (in his irrational mind) what he would do while on the drive home. He may have just considered it, and as soon as he knew LE was on to him, made his final decision. He left before protestors arrived, leaving only his family behind to face the wrath.

I think that's a reasonable theory. And maybe he needed to go home to get the gun.

 

[BeachSky]

Brian Laundrie's Gabby Petito confession: Experts weigh in on admitted killer's claims, 'This is all lies' | Fox News

Gabby Petito murder: Brian Laundrie’s notebook confession revealed, 'I ended her life'

www.foxnews.com

"In any event, euthanasia is not legal in any state, anywhere. Euthanasia is murder."
— Dr. Cyril Wecht to Fox News Digital

Jenn Bethune, who was in the area of Wyoming at the time of Petito's death, disputed Laundrie's claims regarding the temperature. Bethune told Fox News Digital the weather was around the high 40s, instead of the 38 degrees Fahrenheit that Laundrie claimed.
Laundrie's attempt to portray Petito's death as a mercy killing by strangling her on the spot instead of dragging her to the car and going for help makes no sense, Kelly said.
"I don’t believe in all this accident stuff because how can you say you love somebody so much, you can't go on without her, you love her so much you're willing to commit suicide like a Romeo and Juliet?" Kelly asked. "She's hurt, and you will not go and get help for her. And not only will you not go the extra mile, you will not even report her missing."

 

[NCWatcher]

There you have it. More of the ever-changing story.
Everything but the truth.

CL and RL are still in CYA mode, unwilling to face the reality that they failed Gabby, Gabby‘s parents, and even their own son. Had they notified and cooperated with authorities from the start, Gabbys parents may have been spared weeks of anguish in uncertainty. BL would likely be alive and behind bars awaiting due process, rather than having been found dead in a swamp.

Yet here we are, deciphering a notebook from their son and cryptic messages from their lawyer.

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

JMO

What evidence do we have that indicates the undated letter was written after GP's death? I haven't seen anything myself one way or the other. One lawyer, the one doing most of the talking, says he believes it was written after GP died, the other lawyer says it wasn't. I've not seen an "ever-changing story" about the letter, a letter we've only known about for a few days.

It seems that one side believes if RL was writing to her son about ways to "deal with" GP that means she must have been dead and RL must have known that. That GP didn't ever pose any problem for BL except after she was dead I do understand why her family and their legal rep would filter everything through those assumptions but those assumptions may be unfounded.

Without knowing exactly what the letter says, it's seems to me it's just as possible RL anticipated problems between GP and BL before they set out on the trip and was suggesting how BL might deal with difficulties he encountered traveling with GP. Nobody has said the couple had a good relationship. Friends, even from HS, didn't think so. Said they were both always exhibiting high drama. CL denied seeing violence at all but said they fought a fair amount when they lived with her. Her family has said they didn't know anything was wrong. That's probably true or it could be an unconscious psychological defense (because it would be painful to admit there were red flags.) But even her family didn't praise the relationship as good and strong. And an iffy relationship in close quarters, together pretty much 24/7... I think most mature adults would realize it would be good to have a Plan B or rather several Plan B's. The letter could have also been written after Moab as things seemed to be unraveling.

JMO

 

[steeltowngirl]

What evidence do we have that indicates the undated letter was written after GP's death? I haven't seen anything myself one way or the other. One lawyer, the one doing most of the talking, says he believes it was written after GP died, the other lawyer says it wasn't. I've not seen an "ever-changing story" about the letter, a letter we've only known about for a few days.

It seems that one side believes if RL was writing to her son about ways to "deal with" GP that means she must have been dead and RL must have known that. That GP didn't ever pose any problem for BL except after she was dead I do understand why her family and their legal rep would filter everything through those assumptions but those assumptions may be unfounded.

Without knowing exactly what the letter says, it's seems to me it's just as possible RL anticipated problems between GP and BL before they set out on the trip and was suggesting how BL might deal with difficulties he encountered traveling with GP. Nobody has said the couple had a good relationship. Friends, even from HS, didn't think so. Said they were both always exhibiting high drama. CL denied seeing violence at all but said they fought a fair amount when they lived with her. Her family has said they didn't know anything was wrong. That's probably true or it could be an unconscious psychological defense (because it would be painful to admit there were red flags.) But even her family didn't praise the relationship as good and strong. And an iffy relationship in close quarters, together pretty much 24/7... I think most mature adults would realize it would be good to have a Plan B or rather several Plan B's. The letter could have also been written after Moab as things seemed to be unraveling.

JMO

Well.. the tweet from the attorney is now taken down. But it left in question when the letter was written. The letter is simply the latest chapter in the story of what they knew and when they knew it. Now they don’t know when the letter was written?

More examples of stories changing:

Brian Laundrie's Parents Change Story on When They Last Saw Him

Laundrie's parents said they may have last seen their son on September 13, as investigators continue searching for the 23-year-old.

www.newsweek.com

Brian Laundrie’s parents change story about when he went hiking in reserve

Brian Laundrie left his family’s Florida home to take a hike a day earlier than his parents had previously told authorities, their attorney said in a new report.

nypost.com

Brian Laundrie’s Parents Change Story About When They Last Saw Their Son

The lawyer representing Brian Laundrie’s parents has presented a new timeline of Brian’s disappearance, revealing that he went missing earlier than the Laundries initially told police. As previously reported, Laundrie’s parents told authorities on September 17 that they had not seen their son...

www.crimeonline.com

 

[NCWatcher]

Well.. the tweet from the attorney is now taken down. But it left in question when the letter was written. The letter is simply the latest chapter in the story of what they knew and when they knew it. Now they don’t know when the letter was written?

More examples of stories changing:

Brian Laundrie's Parents Change Story on When They Last Saw Him

Laundrie's parents said they may have last seen their son on September 13, as investigators continue searching for the 23-year-old.

www.newsweek.com

Brian Laundrie’s parents change story about when he went hiking in reserve

Brian Laundrie left his family’s Florida home to take a hike a day earlier than his parents had previously told authorities, their attorney said in a new report.

nypost.com

[UR unfurl="true"]https://www.crimeonline.com/2021/10...nge-story-about-when-they-last-saw-their-son/[/URL]

Well, those 3 stories are all about the same incident (when the L's last saw BL) and were all published in early Oct. So I'm not sure it's accurate to call them "more examples" (plural) and 9-month old stories certainly aren't examples of current story changes.

You wrote "Now they don’t know when the letter was written?"

No one (that I know of) has claimed the L's don't know when the letter was written, or rather that the writer, RL, doesn't know. (CL may not know.) But I'm sure RL has a good idea. (I wouldn't necessarily remember the exact day I wrote a letter either but I'd know the general time period.) But neither of the L's feels the need to go on camera to tell the public. Not talking ≠ changing the story.

 

[NCWatcher]

Deleted double post

 

[TL4S]

If BL had told his parents the truth of what happened in WY, then why write his suicide letter the way he did? Again, there wasn't a lot of information out yet, GP hadn't been found, and nobody was harassing his parents at that point.

But I am starting to wonder if he did, eventually, tell them she was dead. It would account for them calling their lawyer and remaining silent, especially if they had prior concerns about violence in the relationship and/or they didn't believe their son's story. If we knew the story(s) he told them, maybe their actions would make more sense. IDK.

Personally, I doubt that anyone living on Earth knows what actually happened that night.

 

[Mike in WNY]

What we've heard about Roberta's letter:

* Reilly told us about the letter. If he hadn't no one would be the wiser. Bertilino would still be sitting on without anyone knowing.

* RL offered to assist her son.

* Reilly's understanding is that the letter at one point had been in the van, but then it was taken from the Laundrie home during the time when the search warrant was executed.

* Riley said the letter is pretty interesting.

* Riley said the letter is a pretty odd letter.

* Riley said the letter is pretty extreme.

* Outside of envelop said "burn after you read this."

* Reilly said the surprise on Bertilino's face was very interesting when he read the letter.

* Reilly doesn't think Bertilino knew about the letter.

* Reilly knew the letter had existed.

* Reilly had a good idea what was going to be in that letter.

* The letter is not dated.

* One scenario was "if you go to jail, I'll bake a cake and put a knife in it or saw in it."

* It appears to have been written between the time that Gabby was murdered and Brian committed suicide.

* There are scenarios (plural) presented by Roberta to assist her son.

* RL was not offering to assist her son in his suicide.

* Reilly nor Gabby's mother has a copy of RL's letter.

* Bertilino refused to give them a copy.

* There was also something written in that letter about Gabby. It was an offer that had to do with Gabby.

Am I missing anything?

Heh. Thank you for the summary. Y'know, when it's compiled into a condensed space, I'm wondering if there's any wider an ambiguous and selective brush with which the document can be painted.... by, for the most part, the plaintiff's (biased) attorney. Playing his role, to be sure. I'm suspecting that the "letter" is pretty dang innocuous.. except to readers that are already subjectively/emotionally predisposed to a particular line of thought. Perhaps the "letter" is more a mother's 'words-of-wisdom' note to her child embarking on a next chapter of life. (Obviously, I do not know that one way or another.)

 

[bestill]

There you have it. More of the ever-changing story.
Everything but the truth.

CL and RL are still in CYA mode, unwilling to face the reality that they failed Gabby, Gabby‘s parents, and even their own son. Had they notified and cooperated with authorities from the start, Gabby’s parents may have been spared weeks of anguish in uncertainty. BL would likely be alive and behind bars awaiting due process, rather than having been found dead in a swamp.

Yet here we are, deciphering a notebook from their son and cryptic messages from their lawyer.

The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

JMO

BBM - so much truth in these two sentences! The L's have a lot to live with, at least BL would have been alive and they would have been able to visit him. In this case, and in my opinion, the only reason to not cooperate with authorities is you have something to hide.

Let's do another scenario. BL comes home, without Gabby, in her van,with her credit cards and with her things. BL refuses to say where Gabby is. Gabby's parents start calling and asking questions. You are the L's, you also have questions and the one that can answer them is not cooperating. You realize something horribile must have happened and your son is involved. What would you do? I believe I know what I would not do...I wouldn't block her parents and prevent them from contacting me. I would want to know everything that they know and I would want to help piece it all together. Even if my son were involved a decent parent and person would help find the missing young woman that lived with you and your family loved unless you are involved.

This is all my opinion and I'm sure it will trigger others too.

 

[wnk]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1540491789014106112

The discrepancy between when Reilly thinks the letter from RL was written (after GP's death) vs when Bertolino thinks the letter was written (months ago) tells me that RL was careful not to write things out explicitly or refer directly to specific times or places. The letter probably uses vague references or insinuations that could provide deniability or call into question what was really being referred to.

(For instance, ambiguous words like "incident" or "situation" could refer either to GP's death, the police stop at Moab, or something completely unrelated. WHEN he received it would determine how BL would read it.)

IF, however, this was some innocent piece of motherly advice about BL & GP's relationship, would you really need to talk in code? Would you need to write "Burn after you read this" on the envelope? (Because yeah, that would totally keep GP from reading it if she found it lying around the van, and I'm sure she'd never notice BL randomly burning documents at their evening campfire. /sarcasm) Putting so much extra thought and effort into it tells me that RL had something to hide.

 

[Sundog]

The discrepancy between when Reilly thinks the letter from RL was written (after GP's death) vs when Bertolino thinks the letter was written (months ago) tells me that RL was careful not to write things out explicitly or refer directly to specific times or places. The letter probably uses vague references or insinuations that could provide deniability or call into question what was really being referred to.

(For instance, ambiguous words like "incident" or "situation" could refer either to GP's death, the police stop at Moab, or something completely unrelated. WHEN he received it would determine how BL would read it.)

IF, however, this was some innocent piece of motherly advice about BL & GP's relationship, would you really need to talk in code? Would you need to write "Burn after you read this" on the envelope? (Because yeah, that would totally keep GP from reading it if she found it lying around the van, and I'm sure she'd never notice BL randomly burning documents at their evening campfire. /sarcasm) Putting so much extra thought and effort into it tells me that RL had something to hide.

"Burn after you read this" could just have been shorthand for "toss it in the campfire" after you read it, or just some tongue-in-cheek expression.

 

[TL4S]

Another possibility is that RL was aware of some things that her husband was not, and the "burn after you read this" comment was meant to keep it private between her and her son.

 

[lxmx]

I wonder if they ordered waters and the staff brought them chips and salsa, which is complimentary at many Mexican restaurants and they didn’t order anything else. Some restaurants do not state anything about having to order anything to get the free chips, so they are the chips, used the Wi-Fi, drank the non bottled water and jetted.

I would think this would be very easy to verify. The manager stated something to the effect that a server chased them outside and Gabby paid the bill with her credit card. I would imagine that a credit card charge is easy to look up after the fact. The amount of the bill would presumably indicate how much, if any, food was ordered. All MOO.

 

[NCWatcher]

The discrepancy between when Reilly thinks the letter from RL was written (after GP's death) vs when Bertolino thinks the letter was written (months ago) tells me that RL was careful not to write things out explicitly or refer directly to specific times or places. The letter probably uses vague references or insinuations that could provide deniability or call into question what was really being referred to.

(For instance, ambiguous words like "incident" or "situation" could refer either to GP's death, the police stop at Moab, or something completely unrelated. WHEN he received it would determine how BL would read it.)

IF, however, this was some innocent piece of motherly advice about BL & GP's relationship, would you really need to talk in code? Would you need to write "Burn after you read this" on the envelope? (Because yeah, that would totally keep GP from reading it if she found it lying around the van, and I'm sure she'd never notice BL randomly burning documents at their evening campfire. /sarcasm) Putting so much extra thought and effort into it tells me that RL had something to hide.

I'm not sure that vagueness in the letter (assuming it's there-- we don't really know that) means RL was hiding something. It could also mean she was speaking in hypotheticals because she was worried about future problems. If it hadn't happened yet, any discussion or advice from.mom.would have to be somewhat vague. She could have been worried about the state of the relationship in general or about the enforced closeness of "van life" (we know the couple fought alot on their first trip but decided it was because the Nissan was too small-- yeah, right)

RL might not have intended the private letter to her son to be shared anyone including Gabby. Hence the burn notation. Or that could have been a joke. For all we know it was a running joke in the L family.

 

[lowes123]

Words can so easily be interpreted in different ways. Without a date on the card, it is anyone's guess as to what it means, unless Brian's mom comes out and says something. The family has taken to heart their attorney's advice to remain silent, which is their absolute right to do, especially with a potential trial going on. Both lawyers are going to put their own spin on this letter, on their clients behalf. Unless she written something like "I know you killed Gabby" in it, then we probably won't know when the letter was written.

 

[GRT]

In some (perhaps all) states, you can sue a person's estate if the offender is also deceased. BL had next to nothing as far as we know. Can you sue the offender's family if the offender is deceased?

My attorney is fond of telling me, "You can sue the pope for rape---but, you might not win."

You can sue anyone for virtually anything, but the suit might not make it very far before a judge tosses it out.

In this situation, I can't see a case against B's parents winning, because they didn't do anything illegal. Granted, it's a civil suit, not a criminal suit, but there still has to be cause.

I get it that G's family are likely sick and tired of the way the L's acted, but I think most parents would act in a manner similar to the way they did. They had to have sensed B was suicidal, and no parent is going to push their child closer to death--even if it means not sharing what they might know.

By the time B's body was found, so much animosity had grown between the families (bouyed by the media), that there was virtually no chance for them to make amends.