AZ AZ - Adrienne Salinas, 19, Tempe , 15 June 2013 - #7

[SandSage]

But there are 2 other Starbuck employees listed that LE talked to, ie, the Starbuck's surveillance cameras, had they seen Adrienne...

I'm not sure the 911 caller who happened to work at Starbucks worked at the Starbucks listed in the police report (in fact, I rather doubt it.). The 911 caller is named in the report. The Starbucks employees were interviewed regarding camera footage (IIRC) - correct me if I am mistaken please.

I think the real question is why the AM/PM and it's employees have been exempted from this report (unless of course all that is on page 34).

 

[SandSage]

but there are 2 other starbuck employees listed that le talked to, ie, the starbuck's surveillance cameras, had they seen adrienne...

jinx!

 

[SandSage]

Aha thank u!

SandSage, save my brain today!!! :scared:

<3 Lots of info 2Hip... I can hear your gears from here.

 

[cluciano63]

Alexis' case is not really like Adrienne's at all, JMO.

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

I'm not sure the 911 caller who happened to work at Starbucks worked at the Starbucks listed in the police report (in fact, I rather doubt it.). The 911 caller is named in the report. The Starbucks employees were interviewed regarding camera footage (IIRC) - correct me if I am mistaken please.

I think the real question is why the AM/PM and it's employees have been exempted from this report (unless of course all that is on page 34).

Zank u! I wrote that whole long thing about AMPM that you thanked and then deleted it bc I figured it was being stupid/wrong. I'm on new meds today. Fab.

Yeah the exemption of AMPM info is driving me carazay

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

It's actually cool if I'm kind of stupid today bc everyone learned more by contradicting any of my mental misfires.

Usually those corrections merit amazing bouts of critical thinking and original theories.

So if I mess up... correct it vehemently and make it a point of interest! This is how everyone gets ideas! (from correcting silly dilly's like me) hehe

:drumroll:

 

[Tonto]

If the cab driver was seen waiting at AM PM and Adrienne never showed up there...maybe they learned that from video pretty quickly?

Maybe it would have been in the police report that she called the cab and was heading that way. Maybe her calls to him and vice versa would be (generally) outlined. Strangely absent, that part of the story was. Yet it is well known and has been from the get go. No names, no locations, no mentions of alibi verifications, no mention of warrants, no mention of DNA collection, yada yada yada.

Indeed. They've apparently 'cleared' him so much they've wiped him from public record entirely. It wasn't even redacted - it simply wasn't there. There's a reason for that, IMO.

 

[SandSage]

It's actually cool if I'm kind of stupid today bc everyone learned more by contradicting any of my mental misfires.

Usually those corrections merit amazing bouts of critical thinking and original theories.

So if I mess up... correct it vehemently and make it a point of interest! This is how everyone gets ideas! (from correcting silly dilly's like me) hehe

:drumroll:

Worked for meeeeee! LOL!!!

 

[cluciano63]

Maybe it would have been in the police report that she called the cab and was heading that way. Maybe her calls to him and vice versa would be (generally) outlined. Strangely absent, that part of the story was. Yet it is well known and has been from the get go. No names, no locations, no mentions of alibi verifications, no mention of warrants, no mention of DNA collection, yada yada yada.

Indeed. They've apparently 'cleared' him so much they've wiped him from public record entirely. It wasn't even redacted - it simply wasn't there. There's a reason for that, IMO.

I agree...they intended to and have since searched his home, etc, but did not want to name him a suspect or even POI so I am not surprised his name is left out. Or that of anyone else they may still be looking at. I would not expect to even be able to receive a police report on an open criminal case, really.

 

[Tonto]

I agree...they intended to and have since searched his home, etc, but did not want to name him a suspect or even POI so I am not surprised his name is left out. Or that of anyone else they may still be looking at.

Yet boyfriend's story is there, name and all, as are the roommates and various random witnesses and people on the streets. In fact, everything is there but that entire storyline. That's telling, IMO.

 

[Bernina]

I'm not sure the 911 caller who happened to work at Starbucks worked at the Starbucks listed in the police report (in fact, I rather doubt it.). The 911 caller is named in the report. The Starbucks employees were interviewed regarding camera footage (IIRC) - correct me if I am mistaken please.

I think the real question is why the AM/PM and it's employees have been exempted from this report (unless of course all that is on page 34).

They would have been listed under "Subjects", just added to the list......so how weird is that? Circle K, O'Reilly, and Starbuck employees all listed under subjects if they were talked to, but nada for AMPM......
There are only 6 people I can't put into any police narrative, subjects 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, and 31, are these the "Party Goers"? #8, 9, 10, and 11 were at the party.....that makes 10 Party Goers accounted for.........WHERE ARE THE REST?
Throw out any subject # and I have them cross referenced. Even the juveniles who were stopped in the park.

 

[cluciano63]

I still don't know why LE would release any of this to the public, in an open case. And clearly they will remove what they don't want the public to know anyway. Even with freedom of info laws, there are usually restrictions about open criminal cases. So I guess I was not expecting much anyway.

 

[Bernina]

Subject:
1-5: Door to door, Brown Street Residents
6: Dad
7: Mom
8-9: Room Mates
10: BF
11: Individual with a crush on Adrienne, "allegedly"
12: Witness to car accident
13: Broken cell phone finder/Community Center
14-17: Street canvas, Jaycee Park, 1st street
18-20: Circle K employees
21-22: Starbuck's employees
23: O'Reilly's employee
24-25: Unknown, can't find ?
26-27: Maricopa County Sheriff's Officers
28-31: Unknown, can't find ?
32-33: Juveniles at Park (blacked out)
34-36: Street canvas, Jaycee Park

The "Unknowns" have no reports of interaction with LE as far as this "GOR". If someone catches it, post, my brains cells got overworked cross referencing the subjects to incidents.

 

[Bernina]

I'm going back to my theory I got mercilessly laughed at for stating threads ago:

I think she got into a car at the circle K thinking it was a cab. The person in the drivers seat played like he was a cab and took off with her. Maybe even the delivery drivers car was what she mistook for a cab?

The delivery driver was either driving a semi or one of those refrigerated trucks that have "Circle K" on the sides and back from what I've seen...........I kinda think the K Corp. would have not only "governors" on the speedometers but GPS as well. Theft, insurance, and quality control, ya know..... :twocents:

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

Hm, I haven't checked on the latest developments in DR's case, but I think the general consensus was "Daddy did it", and I'm unaware of a Circle K connection. But then again, I'm blissfully unaware of Circle K in general, so that might explain why I'm missing an otherwise obvious connection.

Here is a good example/study/article about the disproportionate amount of crimes that happen in excess at circle K stores. (literally stumbled over this and thought I'd share! Pretty cool stumbling step!)
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/20110710asu-study-circle-k-police-calls.html

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

The delivery driver was either driving a semi or one of those refrigerated trucks that have "Circle K" on the sides and back from what I've seen...........I kinda think the K Corp. would have not only "governors" on the speedometers but GPS as well. Theft, insurance, and quality control, ya know..... :twocents:

Thanks Bernina! Thank goodness you are here to inject me with a healthy dose of common sense on this loopiest of days. (starts hanging from the rafters).

 

[Bernina]

Something else that happened at Adrienne's apt complex......doesn't seem like the management has a grip on their tenants. JMO

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow?widgetid=87601

 

[SandSage]

something else that happened at adrienne's apt complex......doesn't seem like the management has a grip on their tenants. Jmo

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow?widgetid=87601

omg. :'(

 

[2Hip2BSquare]

omg. :'(

Kitties? Noooo! :scared:

 

[Seajay]

Something else that happened at Adrienne's apt complex......doesn't seem like the management has a grip on their tenants. JMO

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow?widgetid=87601

Wonder how long they were left there before found?

It should be easy to track down the people who did this from the rental agreement.

When my son went to U of A, I had to sign a lease on a year to year basis for him to live there. He had 2 roomies and their parents also had to sign the lease, guaranteeing the full amount of the rent for the lease duration. They thoroughly checked us out before they would lease to our kids. FWIW. (Which I'm finding out means very little.)