Brianna Denison 19yo Reno NV #8

[txsvicki]

Yes he entered the apartment where he took Brianna, but he did not break in and steal underware.

I assume you are talking about the underware left with Brianna's body. One pair was taken with her body so it makes since that it would be left with her body. The other pair, as I have stated before, is the odd piece to this puzzle. Was it left on purpose by the perp? Was it accidently left by the perp? Was it already there when he dropped Brianna's body?

We don't know that he didn't enter the apartment previously and take underwear especially since the door was unlocked that night. It could have been hours before like SS said, or days before. Many women have so many pairs of underwear that they'd never miss one. We don't know that the underwear were taken at the same time as the abduction, not for sure.
Also, the freak could have had both pair of underwear in his pocket since he probably had his hands full with getting poor Brianna out of the apartment. I'm not sure they'd necessarily get entwined in a pocket though. To me, entwined means actually looping in and around each other .

 

[MCDRAW]

This is possible, don't get me wrong, but as a general rule, girls don't borrow underwear. It's icky. I wouldn't even loan my sister underwear even if they were clean and had only been worn once.

I wouldn't either but my younger sister and her friends didn't care. They shared everything. They always grossed me out.

 

[strach304]

Read the latest media link Adnoid posted and look at how the underwear being intertwined is described. I don't get by the way it's worded that they were intertwined together, with each other, whatever. But rather intertwined with her body, which could mean anything. What do you guys take from that report and the wording?

 

[10EC_Dad]

We don't know that he didn't enter the apartment previously and take underwear especially since the door was unlocked that night. It could have been hours before like SS said, or days before. Many women have so many pairs of underwear that they'd never miss one. We don't know that the underwear were taken at the same time as the abduction, not for sure.
Also, the freak could have had both pair of underwear in his pocket since he probably had his hands full with getting poor Brianna out of the apartment. I'm not sure they'd necessarily get entwined in a pocket though. To me, entwined means actually looping in and around each other .

There were no signs of forceable entry that we are aware of. I think that you are missing the point that, contrary to your opinion, he has not been known to successfully break into anyone's apartment. He has been known to be unsuccessful in attempt to break in.

Alot of things are possible. He seems to attack at night, we could assume he is a vampire, if we wanted to be so absurd.

I agree that entwined can mean several things.

 

[10EC_Dad]

Read the latest media link Adnoid posted and look at how the underwear being intertwined is described. I don't get by the way it's worded that they were intertwined together, with each other, whatever. But rather intertwined with her body, which could mean anything. What do you guys take from that report and the wording?

Here is an exerpt from the LE statement:

"Struffert said the pink underwear was found at the scene intertwined with a pair of distinctive black women’s underwear described as having the caricatures of the head of the “Pink Panther” and pink hearts on a black cotton field."

The way it is stated gives me the impression that they were intertwined together. I could see your interpretation if the statement was more like: the pink underware and pair of distinctive black women's underwear were intertwined with the body. Does that make sense?

 

[philamena]

Originally Posted by jennyjwv
......- who's to say the perp wasn't already in the house either if the door was unlocked???

jennyjwv,
That is an excellent question.
Big party weekend, who knows how many people were at the house? Who knows if KT has been totally honest with police?

 

[Snowbird]

AP speculates that something said at the Press Conference infers that police believe both sets of underwear were from the house. There was DNA left at the house (many here believe it was from oily prints or something).

There is DNA on the pink underwear (we may surmise that it is semen or other fluid). But, there is none of his DNA on the PP thong.

How does a guy leave DNA at the house on one set of UW but not on the other, yet someone infers that the pink underwear was also taken from the house? How could that pair of underwear not contain his DNA but other items do? He doesn't seem to wear gloves, otherwise no DNA at the house. But, how does the PP thong not have his DNA on it?

At some point it seems he has to be wearing gloves when handling the PP thong. Could he have dressed Brianna with the PP thong while wearing gloves and place them over the pink underwear? And then, he strips both pair of underwear off when disposing of the body (that's how I think they are entwined and near the body).

The DNA he left at the house could be hair from his head rather than oily handprints.

 

[10EC_Dad]

jennyjwv,
That is an excellent question.
Big party weekend, who knows how many people were at the house? Who knows is KT has been totally honest with police?[/quote]

What do you think she is being dishonest about?

 

[philamena]

I think the underwear excites the suspect. Even though he could have strangled her with his bare hands, the underwear provided him with the sexual excitement.

Leila,
Hey, so you're saying he specificially planned to use panties as a weapon? I'm not convinced of that yet.
The perp is smart enough to not get caught but he didn't try to kill his other victims. (The victims we know about.) So I'm not sure he was smart enough to plan on taking UW to use as a weapon.

 

[txsvicki]

I think I'm going to go by what the official LE website has to say instead of media. The article that Adnoid linked says the panties were intertwined with Brianna's body and that's not what LE said. Also, the LE site says that the perp is described as having a light covering of hair on his arms, not blonde hair. Now I'm going to have to go see if LE is really not sure how the pink underwear were taken from the apartment like the article says. If true, then the girl may not know when they were taken or have worn them only the day before the adbuction.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I see how you are trying to piece this theory together. It's just not working for me yet. I may just be slow.

It is quickly accepted that he can break into the apartment of his victims and steal their panties prior to attacking them. Yet, we don't know of any successful breaking and entry by this perp. We do, on the other hand, know of one unsuccessful breaking and entry.

We don't know if he stole the underwear of any victim prior to attacking them. This whole panty fetish theory seems to have been started after the PP thongs were found with Brianna's body.

Obviously, some people have a panty fetish and it is reasonable that a sex offender have such a fetish. Beyond that, I am not sure we have much to build a strong theory concerning this perp having a panty fetish.

I have to agree. I do not believe the panty fetish theory nor do I believe he tried to break into victim #2's house to steal her underwear (to rape her again and/or kill her...yes). I also further do not believe he went into the apartment before the abduction to steal other underwear. I still think the underwear's significance is trophy related, but he could have used the pink pair (along with the other pair) to silence or strangle her after finding them in or around where Bri was sleeping.

Obviously, he did something with these underwear which is out of the norm. They weren't just laying around at the crime scene.

 

[10EC_Dad]

I think I'm going to go by what the official LE website has to say instead of media. The article that Adnoid linked says the panties were intertwined with Brianna's body and that's not what LE said. Also, the LE site says that the perp is described as having a light covering of hair on his arms, not blonde hair. Now I'm going to have to go see if LE is really not sure how the pink underwear were taken from the apartment like the article says. If true, then the girl may not know when they were taken or have worn them only the day before the adbuction.

I keep going back to it myself.

 

[txsvicki]

There were no signs of forceable entry that we are aware of. I think that you are missing the point that, contrary to your opinion, he has not been known to successfully break into anyone's apartment. He has been known to be unsuccessful in attempt to break in.

Alot of things are possible. He seems to attack at night, we could assume he is a vampire, if we wanted to be so absurd.

I agree that entwined can mean several things.

I never said he breaks and enters necessarily. I said that he must enter somehow (which he did) and could be doing this before attacking. He entered the apartment where Brianna was staying and tried to get into the previous victim's apartment. At least they think it was him.

 

[10EC_Dad]

I have to agree. I do not believe the panty fetish theory nor do I believe he tried to break into victim #2's house to steal her underwear (to rape her again and/or kill her...yes). I also further do not believe he went into the apartment before the abduction to steal other underwear. I still think the underwear's significance is trophy related, but he could have used the pink pair (along with the other pair) to silence or strangle her after finding them in or around where Bri was sleeping.

Obviously, he did something with these underwear which is out of the norm. They weren't just laying around at the crime scene.

I agree with everyting but the trophy aspect. The trohy theory is very strong related to sexual perps. In this case, we really only know of 3 pairs. The first he may just have not given back to the victim. The other two, he did not keep.

 

[10EC_Dad]

I never said he breaks and enters necessarily. I said that he must enter somehow (which he did) and could be doing this before attacking. He entered the apartment where Brianna was staying and tried to get into the previous victim's apartment. At least they think it was him.

I guess that is is possible that all his victims left their doors open for him.

 

[strach304]

I think I'm going to go by what the official LE website has to say instead of media. The article that Adnoid linked says the panties were intertwined with Brianna's body and that's not what LE said. Also, the LE site says that the perp is described as having a light covering of hair on his arms, not blonde hair. Now I'm going to have to go see if LE is really not sure how the pink underwear were taken from the apartment like the article says. If true, then the girl may not know when they were taken or have worn them only the day before the adbuction.

Thank you! I knew I wasn't crazy :blowkiss: From past cases we have seen where things were misinterpreted and reported that way.

Love your new invention now can we come up with a meaning? Something like with the Nerkely Matina humor?

 

[Leila]

This is from the AP who also said this in an AP acrticle on the KOLO site.

This statement is not in the LE release.

I think we need to go by the information in the official LE release, and not by the media, as there's too many conflicting media reports.

 

[NewMommy09]

You are correct, I have stated this as fact when it is not know to be. I appreciate your stopping this before it goes further!

I agree that he could have hidden in an empty room if one was unlocked. You would think he would have left finger prints but maybe not.

I agree that Jessica could have been the victim he had enough time to take her. That leads me to think that if he was in the apartment prior to Brianna and KT, it was not for long.

I don't see him purposely choosing where to leave his the DNA. It seems like it has been left everywhere except for the PP thong. Did I miss something?

The perp did leave dna at the abduction scene. It may or may not be fingerprints. I don't think it's been reported where the dna was left. I'm also not sure if it was verified that the DNA was an "oily substance". Does anyone here know or remember if that is fact?

No, you didn't miss anything. As I said, the DNA thing is only one of many theory's running through my head.

When the info about the pp underwear was 1st released, some people thought it was left at the scene by accident. With the new info, don't most of us agree that's not the case? That lends much creedence to the theory that the perp is "playing games".

 

[philamena]

jennyjwv,
That is an excellent question.
Big party weekend, who knows how many people were at the house? Who knows if KT has been totally honest with police?[/quote]

Dad's question:

What do you think she is being dishonest about?

Dad,
Do we know for a fact KT has been honest about who was at the house that night? Do we know if KT knew whether people entered and exited after she went to bed? Just asking questions Dad, I am not accusing KT of anything.

 

[philamena]

SNIP

Obviously, he did something with these underwear which is out of the norm. They weren't just laying around at the crime scene.

That's it. I was afraid to say it, but in one of the first statements made after Brianna's body was found, LE said the perp did something 'deranged' or abnormal.
I've wondered from that day if the perp didn't put the UW somewhere in Briana's body. Not on, in.
Like in her mouth or in another orifice.