Found Deceased WY - Gabrielle ‘Gabby’ Petito, 22, Grand Teton National Park, 25 Aug 2021 #76

[JerseyWasHome2]

Yes the second video shows the officer going to the van and saying "hey we got a call about a male hitting a female and the two of them getting into a vehicle and taking off" And Brian responded by stuttering a bit and then saying "I don't intend to defend myself by saying anything here" and then goes into stating that Gabby gets worked up sometimes.
ETA oops! keep forgetting to add the source!

Thanks for the clarification. I remember that now. But as they were still driving, they may not have realized what was happening, why they were being pulled over. So IMOO, I'm still thinking they didn't have time to coordinate stories about who hit who and when and why, if, perhaps, they thought they were being pulled over for speeding and his bumping the curb. Just my opinion, of course.

 

[NuttMegg]

MOO

"Like" 1000 times.

Reactive abuse is the victim's reactions to the abuse they're receiving. Hitting, screaming, being verbally abusive.

Then often the abuser takes advantage of this by making themselves out to be the victim.

And many people see this as both parties being guilty, which I see happening in Gabby's case.

IMO
MOO

Except in this case we have an independent eye witness detailing BL's abuse on her. Slapping and hitting her. That is the FIRST account of the altercation. Before she had to fight back to get into the van he was trying to steal, and her phone too. Guess it's time for a weekly repeat "I (Nuttmegg) would have used a 2X4 if someone was hijacking my car and stealing my phone." Not just "slapped him in a play acting way" as the second witness declared.

Gabby is dead, murdered.

 

[x_files]

That's...not a crime in and of itself.

It's possibly indicative of an overall abusive dynamic, but "preventing a text" isn't a crime. Mean or an inappropriate exercise of control, but not a crime.

Yes, it is. It depends on the state you live in.
No one has a right to take away your phone to prevent you from calling 911, or a friend, or for help.
It is part of DV. You can get a restraining order on that alone.

 

[x_files]

That's...not a crime in and of itself.

It's possibly indicative of an overall abusive dynamic, but "preventing a text" isn't a crime. Mean or an inappropriate exercise of control, but not a crime.

Yes, it is. It depends on the state you live in.
No one has a right to take away your phone to prevent you from calling 911, or a friend, or for help.
It is part of DV. You can get a restraining order on that alone.

 

[Sassafrass]

his birthday is 18th November (he was born in 1997), if I can find that out I'm pretty sure a lawyer should know how old his client is/was

Honestly, this is one of the things I think is not a big deal in SB'S various statements. It's understandable not to have that kind of data point right in front of him at all times. The bigger point is that he was going off into emotional commentary, not whether he referred to BL as 22 or 23, or whether he said he'd known the Ls longer than BL was old but then referred to having known BL since he was a young child (ie not literally his whole life). He just should have stopped trying to personalize, dialed down his emotion and umbrage, and stuck to dull, competent, relatable statements that didn't require him to risk stumbling over meaningless detail.

 

[dacjess]

I have watched both videos and I am sure that the reason the van was locked was that B wanted there to be some space between them, whilst G 'calmed down'.

What am I missing?

I would love if we could all just stop with this particular narrative. Nobody is allowed to lock a car that you own in order to keep you out of it. I don’t care how “un-calm” Gabby was. It’s her van, she is allowed to access it whenever she wants. That’s incredibly controlling behavior and framing it that somehow it was Gabby’s “fault” that she was not allowed access to her own van. That is not okay in any situation. BL could choose to give HIMSELF space so Gabby can calm down if he feels the need to do so. Or he can remove himself from any situation if he doesn’t want to be there. He cannot take her keys and keep her out of her own van. I’m sorry for the rant but that is just not okay, and I don’t care how upset she was acting.
JMO.

 

[Cinna]

But he did tell the officer that he "had no phone", only to pull his phone out of his pocket a few minutes later.

Brian: "I’m not upset with her, but she got all worked up and she had a phone in her hand and keys in her hand, and her rings. And I was looking for the keys. I didn’t want her to go anywhere. And I figures, I don’t have my phone. I don’t really, I don’t have a phone. She goes off without me. I’m on my own. "

He clearly is saying that he didn't have a phone on him at the time of the fight. They were away from the van and he was afraid she would drive off without him - taking his phone with her and leaving him stranded. The fight was over the keys.

Gabby Petito & Brian Laundrie Utah Bodycam Footage Transcript Before Disappearance - Rev
He never said he didn't have a phone at all.

 

[MsJosie]

I hope All of Gabby’s items left at the Laundries or that were in the van that were taken out when BL took or maybe even stole the van (we are not sure), those items are returned to Gabby’s family through LE. Not through their lawyer. Rightfully those items belong to Gabby and then to her family. The Laundries are not family and should not keep anything belonging to Gabby. With that said I believe many items are now gone, probably trashed. JMOO. I want Gabby’s family to get as much closure as they can. Moo.

 

[sarahboirin]

Honestly, this is one of the things I think is not a big deal in SB'S various statements. It's understandable not to have that kind of data point right in front of him at all times. The bigger point is that he was going off into emotional commentary, not whether he referred to BL as 22 or 23, or whether he said he'd known the Ls longer than BL was old but then referred to having known BL since he was a young child (ie not literally his whole life). He just should have stopped trying to personalize, dialed down his emotion and umbrage, and stuck to dull, competent, relatable statements that didn't require him to risk stumbling over meaningless detail.

Absolutely, I just don't get why, if his clients have no comment to make, he feels the need to do interviews and cause more confusion moo

 

[Mom24]

Thanks for the clarification. I remember that now. But as they were still driving, they may not have realized what was happening, why they were being pulled over. So IMOO, I'm still thinking they didn't have time to coordinate stories about who hit who and when and why, if, perhaps, they thought they were being pulled over for speeding and his bumping the curb. Just my opinion, of course.

No problem! It's all clear as mud, isn't it?

 

[ivegotcha]

According to the reporter who trailed the Ls that day, CL went off the trail 8-10 times before he found BL's possessions.
BBM
https://twitter.com/staticlogic/status/1451363844694155267Casual Observer
@staticlogic
yes, how many times did he search in the brush off the path? one magical time?


Michael Ruiz@mikerreports
8-10

I know there are postings of individual thoughts it was planted.... Don't think so, if we can go back to when the Mustang had the notice to move sticker at the Reserve Parking Lot, I believe that when they went to retrieve the vehicle they left that for him in that area as it was his spot to go too. When the father went out searching the other day , he tried to find those items it was his way of knowing if his son found them or ? and with the items being there he knew....

 

[esayer]

Brian: "I’m not upset with her, but she got all worked up and she had a phone in her hand and keys in her hand, and her rings. And I was looking for the keys. I didn’t want her to go anywhere. And I figures, I don’t have my phone. I don’t really, I don’t have a phone. She goes off without me. I’m on my own. "

He clearly is saying that he didn't have a phone on him at the time of the fight. They were away from the van and he was afraid she would drive off without him - taking his phone with her and leaving him stranded. The fight was over the keys.

Gabby Petito & Brian Laundrie Utah Bodycam Footage Transcript Before Disappearance - Rev
He never said he didn't have a phone at all.

yes he did, The video clearly shows he said he didn't have a phone and he lied to LE.

 

[iamnotagolem]

I would love if we could all just stop with this particular narrative. Nobody is allowed to lock a car that you own in order to keep you out of it. I don’t care how “un-calm” Gabby was. It’s her van, she is allowed to access it whenever she wants. That’s incredibly controlling behavior and framing it that somehow it was Gabby’s “fault” that she was not allowed access to her own van. That is not okay in any situation. BL could choose to give HIMSELF space so Gabby can calm down if he feels the need to do so. Or he can remove himself from any situation if he doesn’t want to be there. He cannot take her keys and keep her out of her own van. I’m sorry for the rant but that is just not okay, and I don’t care how upset she was acting.
JMO.

Just piggybacking off your post here, it bothers me so much that people justify his abuse because she was trying to keep him from stealing her phone & van.

or that people question “why didn’t she just tell LE that he was abusive?” When she was probably terrified of what would happen if she ever told anyone.

Just reading the comments here makes me fear for anyone in an abusive relationship worried they can’t get help because no one will believe them. Worried that it’s okay or normal for a partner to treat them that way. Making excuses for an abuser only perpetuates abuse.

 

[Lillymac]

But when he said "I have no phone" he was talking about the past. Brian was not trying to tell them he didn't have one at all. As in "Im thinking if she leaves me, I have no phone" (because at that time it was in the van, not on him) The officer was asking about the fight they were reported for, not the present.

Okay, I guess I can see how him using improper tense would confuse.

Texting and social media have destroyed grammer!

He was also talking about the phone being dead. Figuratively he had no phone. The charger was in the van so if she took the van he wouldn't have a phone. They made sure to get the charger to him and he could then charge his phone. That's all at the end of the video before they leave.

 

[Gardenista]

He was also talking about the phone being dead. Figuratively he had no phone. The charger was in the van so if she took the van he wouldn't have a phone. They made sure to get the charger to him and he could then charge his phone. That's all at the end of the video before they leave.

It wasn't dead. He turned it on for LE

 

[NuttMegg]

I would love if we could all just stop with this particular narrative. SBM.

I have to ask myself (I really don't, of course) why the flood of posts, the re-hash of the Moab incident.
She is dead, and the probable murderer's body has just been found. And the lawyer just admitted that the parents knew BL was "grieving" way before her body was found. And that they let him use their mustang when he left all bothered and upset and grieving. THAT should be the topic of the day. What did they know, and when did they know it? I'm sure the lawyer will disclose more in short order.

He IMO murdered then discarded this lovely little woman's dead body in a place that predators would most likely find her and possibly scatter her remains to hide his involvement.

He is dead, which robs the Petito/Schmidts of a certain type of closure, <modsnip> IMO

 

[Lore Listener]

That incident did not cause anyone's death. It was an incident in a (probably) long series of incidents, but it was public...which may be seen as an escalation...still, it was not the cause of her death. I just don't see why it keeps getting rehashed. It doesn't answer any questions about what happened two weeks later...only that the ultimate escalation of their fights resulted in her death. jmo

According to Evan Stark, one of the most respected and prolific domestic violence researchers in the US:

So what has happened is that because we have a law that focuses on discreet incidents of violence, and because the vast majority of domestic violence incidents are trivial from a criminal justice or medical standpoint, the vast majority of domestic violence arrests and cases result in absolutely no sanctions that are significant enough, or even approach significant enough, to inhibit subsequent domestic violence crimes. In other words, what we’ve done by turning domestic…by taking an incident specific approach to domestic violence is effectively to turn domestic violence into a second-class misdemeanor for which almost no one goes to jail. But in the 60 percent of the cases where I believe the pattern of violence is complemented by this extended pattern of intimidation, isolation and control, I believe a much more broad-based and fundamental crime needs to be identified and enforced.

Evan Stark

So yes, every incident in the abuse dynamic, no matter how seemingly trivial, tells us about the pattern that led up to Gabby's murder. The violence is the pattern, not the individual incidents. It also matters because there are those, even here, saying "Well, we just don't know for sure yet that Brian actually murdered her," etc. Establishing that the pattern fits the textbook DV pattern (which, as a researcher getting a PhD in this, I strongly believe it does) gives us some level of certainty that the trajectory of abuse led where it so often does--to the abuser murdering the target of the abuse.

Also important: If Brian put his hands around Gabby's neck as she seems to indicate, there is strong evidence that this was a predictably lethal situation. Strangulation is one of the strongest indicators of lethality (as many others have correctly posted about here) even had that not turned out to be Gabby's COD, which makes the hands-on-neck even more vital to understanding the eventual murder of Gabby.

Tools & Strategies for Assessing Danger or Risk of Lethality

 

[imstilla.grandma]

You guys are missing this. Your point will still be here when this concludes.
Still streaming… imo

 

[Gardenista]

Law & Crime

Just now ·
Family Lawyer Says Brian Laundrie’s Remains Were Sent to Anthropologist
Laundrie family lawyer Steve Bertolino told the Law&Crime Network’s Angenette Levy that Brian Laundrie’s remains have been sent to an anthropologist for further testing, and results should come out early next week.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=203065551950320

 

[customCF]

Is this tweet correct? Anybody know, if it will be released publicly too, today?


https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/1451635012223348739

A bit premature IMO unless it was obvious given the pieces that they found.