CA CA - Heidi Planck, 39, left son’s football game in Downey, dog found in Los Angeles, 17 Oct 2021 #3

[annpats]

Why no pleas from her family??? JMO

Because they've probably been told not to. Just like the media and the police, everyone has been told to keep their mouths shut, for reasons unknown.

Granted the video shots are short, but I saw nothing to me that looked like a woman in distress. MOO.

True. But she was just walking her dog, perhaps trying to calm her mind down. I'm not sure if psychological distress would necessarily show. Or at least, she wasn't showing it here.
Maybe the initial meeting she was 'antsy' about it the football game had already taken place by this point.

 

[Steve McQueen]

I can't reconcile this scenario - or any of them, for that matter. It's been nagging at me all day.

With the facts as we know them, I've yet to come up with an explanation without a heck of a lot of assumptions thrown in.

I vote for her disappearing herself. If LE knows this, what are their obligations. Do they have to inform JW, who reported her missing. Do they have to inform the public?

 

[bombardier]

IMO police know exactly if she got in the building and how the dog got to the 29th floor. It's been a HOT minute since I've been in a building's elevator and have not seen a dome-type CCTV camera (I like to pull faces at them and act like an idiot in case anyone actually checks them). Lobbies of apartment buildings, especially fancy expensive one, are always outfitted with some CCTV. Even if individual floors don't have cameras, they would be able to see whose riding the elevators, hard to miss as the person would have a dog w/ them. If this was a low floor it would be possible that someone took the stairs but I don't think even Usain Bolt would subject himself to 29 floors of stairs.

I know police got to the building and finally got security footage kind of late, but I do think they got the footage they were seeking and it had not been taped over yet. I think if they still had doubts, they would be asking the public for help. Civilians are releasing footage rather than LE because they do not need further info and have no reason to release or seek out more.
(all IMO please tell me if conflicting info has been released and I missed it!)

 

[Curiosa20]

Because this is all so murky if we postulate that Heidi released her dog in the building or allowed him to be released, the only alternatives I see to her running away/or going into custody would be for her to be confined or frozen in an apartment or carried out in some packaging. Those gruesome complicated concepts don’t appeal to me.. I just don’t think she was meeting a stranger or random psychopath. I think she was scared of consequences of professional activities, an unknown, but not afraid. Maybe she argued because she wanted her boyfriend to come down for her possibly last available week end. Maybe she found out she was in danger and has no option but to leave in some capacity.

If she was going into hiding it seems natural that she would want Seven to be with her son. Her contact info - phone number- was in the microchip. If he had his collar on and we don’t know, they could have called or texted her phone but she had left it behind in her house, so she knew that she had probably 3- 4 days until it was her turn to pick up BW and her phone would be checked when a MP report was filed when she didn’t show, or when her friend went to check on her at the house the next day and found a phone or phones, 10/18, so anyway you look at it she had time.
JW declared he did not see the do you miss your dog text message until approximately 10/28 but that the finders had messaged that they found Seven within 3 hours of her leaving the game. He said he spent days searching around for what he called a “retro-fitted” chip to be identified so he could locate Seven. It took JW according to his account approximately 10 days to locate the dog after she went missing because he didn’t look at messages for 3/5 days after filing the MP report. It’s a convoluted tale.
She is chameleon-like. It would be easy to disguise herself but not the dog, if she is out and about somewhere; there are tens of thousands of nooks and crannies and garages in LA. Leaving Seven for her son who most probably loves the dog and is comforted by him and vice versa was a kind action.
There are cameras inside and outside of the building. Staff have said they know her and the dog. So LE must have video and interviews but the public has not been apprised, even though it is a high profile case. Hopefully we will hear official information soon.
Her family has not made a plea. In fact, none of them have ever made a direct request much less a public plea through supportive local news media for help in finding her that I am aware of. It’s all very peculiar.
We keep thinking her RR should have been at or near the building but I now don’t know why. There are so many other possibilities for arriving downtown. According to some reports, parking was checked but her RR was not located on site.
MOO

 

[303gmf]

IMO, it was an accidental drug overdose. Probably something with fentanyl which is easily being brought over the border now.

Flown in from China and India as well

 

[303gmf]

And she did not appear to be walking like a person on drugs. MOO

Interesting
Have you ever been around a cocaine user?
Adderall abuser?
Someone hoping to score most any type of drug could be acting giddy and hopeful even if opioids were the meds of choice

 

[KBlackRabbit]

I though she was looking up at the building.

I think so too. She was walking with her dog (that she couldn’t leave in her car), carrying a mask, did not carry a purse, and she looked up at the building. I don’t think she went there for drugs because she’d probably want a handbag to carry the cash in and the drugs out, this seems personal, someone she knew well enough to disrupt her son’s game for.

 

[NCWatcher]

Completely agree and also its kind of odd that he even gave the plate #...I don't even know my own without looking if I were asked, let alone someone else's. And maybe he had some documentation with it on there say for school security or something who knows but why is it totally different then. Its not like its a # or letter off where it could have just gotten messed it, its completely different and I believe someone on here posted that the plate or vin traced back to a Porsche?

Apparently JW did say in court records that she had bought three in the course of a few months or something along those lines, which also seems crazy because where would she keep them or be buying and selling etc what is the point in that and where is that money coming from? We don't know when she did this though, if it was years ago or recent and I wonder how new the RR is? Buying that many cars in a short period of time also could be signs of bipolar and episodes of mania or could also show her need to be changing her identity often with having different cars and wigs. But at this point it looks like she did maybe use an old plate from one of the Porsches she bought if that plate or vin goes back to that brand of car. However, that would also make it seem like buying all these was more recent then considering you wouldn't want to put expired plates on as you could be pulled over easily for and could draw unwanted attention with LE.

According to this site (& others)
Autotrader - page unavailable (link works, page down to bottom)

in CA vehicle plates transfer when a car is sold. In my state (NC) that's not true. Here, although annual replacement "sticker" fees are required, as long as it's in good shape and remains readable, the plate itself can be reused for up to 10 years before mandatory replacement. It's not a choice to replace it after 10 years-- the annual registration letter makes that quite clear! And it's not 10 yrs on the new car, but 10 years total new and old car(s) usage combined. In CA the plate goes with the sold car. So when HP sold each of the 3 Porsches she supposed owned, a different plate should have gone with each of the sales. (Even with tag transfer, that's one reason it's expensive to buy and sell cars frequently. New registrations cost money even with existing tags.) Anyway, none of the Porsche plates could legally be put on the RR. The only exception in CA is for specialty or personalized plates as they those belong to the owner.

So if a plate photographed on the RR truly traces back to a Porsche, and it wasn't a personalized or specialty plate, it surely sounds like something hinky was done per CA law. OTOH, if the plate number was located in non-DMV database and was associated with Heidi at one point and now tracks back associated with a Porsche, that makes perfect sense. It's on a Porsche HP sold.

I can't imagine a legit reason to photograph the RR with the plate from another car. It's not a legal or even quasi-legal "short-cut" because the RR couldn't be registered to her with the wrong plate. (If the used RR came from a dealer, usually the dealer does the work of transferring stuff, at least in my state. They charge a fee for that but I don't think the fee is optional for a dealer.) And the owners of the new Porsche likely would have a heck of a time registering their used Porsche without the plate it was supposed to come with. So I'd think the plate on the RR was its plate at the time of the photograph. BUT that plate could have been replaced since the photo was taken if the old plate became unreadable or was stolen or lost. HP also could have changed a personalized plate to a standard one or vice versa.

JMO

 

[distracted]

I vote for her disappearing herself. If LE knows this, what are their obligations. Do they have to inform JW, who reported her missing. Do they have to inform the public?

It might depend on the jurisdiction. If they find her, they might make contact. The problem is that it's not against the law for an adult to disappear and it's not the responsibility of LE to inform those who are left behind what they might find, which is why LE doesn't take missing adult cases unless they're fairly certain that foul play is involved. It could be considered a violation of someone's rights to tell those left behind that the person has been found and, most certainly, where the person is located.

This is why I don't think she is missing voluntarily. I believe LE has sufficient information that leads them to believe that she was a victim of foul play.

I also don't believe she had a mental break because she doesn't appear to be in distress as she's seen walking her dog, which was reported to have occurred just before she vanished. She also doesn't look like she's in distress getting into her vehicle earlier in the day before she went to the football game.

 

[CharlestonGal]

I think so too. She was walking with her dog (that she couldn’t leave in her car), carrying a mask, did not carry a purse, and she looked up at the building. I don’t think she went there for drugs because she’d probably want a handbag to carry the cash in and the drugs out, this seems personal, someone she knew well enough to disrupt her son’s game for.

The purse she was carrying when she left her house was pretty small, and she was wearing it cross-body. She could easily have been wearing it cross-body under her sweater. Which would have been the smart thing to do in DTLA. It's hard to tell from the video. jmo

 

[annpats]

I can't decide if the disappearance is to do with legal/financial wrongdoings and the drugs are just a red herring, or if the disappearance is to do with drugs and the legal/financial wrongdoings are a red herring.

Hmmmm.

 

[slowpoke]

My answers in line:
1. Do we know the actual time of the football game she attended? She was last seen at the game 4:30. Unclear to me if that’s when she left it.
2. Do we know the actual floor the dog was found on? 29, according to friend DN
3. Do we know for a fact that if the apartment turned over the video? Yes, it has been reported so
4. Did the alley video come from the apartment management or from a private individual? A private individual
5. Did she have a phone with her when she went missing? Yes
6. Has L.E. ever provided an update on this case? No
Sorry for all the questions, but again it's easy to get confused on her. At least for me. lol

My answers are as I believe it to be. It IS a confusing case. So, JMO
Some of my above answers can be found here:
New Video Shows Missing Woman Walking Dog in Downtown LA Hours After Friends Last Saw Her

########

Replying to my own last post to add more info to my answer regarding the flag football game time, and why I stated the time was unclear to me. Two conflicting times were given that I’ve seen (bolded by me):

“That's about two hours after she was last seen by friends at her 10-year-old son's football game in Downey.”
MSN

“The never before seen security tape of Planck in downtown LA, less than an hour after she was last seen in Downey,”
MSN

 

[NCWatcher]

########

Replying to my own last post to add more info to my answer regarding the flag football game time, and why I stated the time was unclear to me. Two conflicting times were given that I’ve seen (bolded by me):

“That's about two hours after she was last seen by friends at her 10-year-old son's football game in Downey.”
MSN

“The never before seen security tape of Planck in downtown LA, less than an hour after she was last seen in Downey,”
MSN

I know nothing about the football league her son plays in but think it's a flag football league. I think I saw the name of the league reported but can't find that now.

But it seems weird to me that IF she left the game at half-time, that would have been as late as 4:30 especially for flag ball. It seems even in mid-Oct that would mean part of the second half of the game would be played as it got dark. Maybe the field has lights but playing under lights is pretty different from playing in daylight, I think. Maybe it had to be that way to cram in multiple games in one day on that field but it seems odd.

I don't see a time on her son's email from that day to see when the game might have ended.

 

[Ducky123]

It might depend on the jurisdiction. If they find her, they might make contact. The problem is that it's not against the law for an adult to disappear and it's not the responsibility of LE to inform those who are left behind what they might find, which is why LE doesn't take missing adult cases unless they're fairly certain that foul play is involved. It could be considered a violation of someone's rights to tell those left behind that the person has been found and, most certainly, where the person is located.

This is why I don't think she is missing voluntarily. I believe LE has sufficient information that leads them to believe that she was a victim of foul play.

I also don't believe she had a mental break because she doesn't appear to be in distress as she's seen walking her dog, which was reported to have occurred just before she vanished. She also doesn't look like she's in distress getting into her vehicle earlier in the day before she went to the football game.

IMO someone doesn’t need to look distressed to be having a mental break, especially if you are medicating (legally or illicitly) to bring yourself up or down.

 

[bears10]

And she did not appear to be walking like a person on drugs. MOO

not all drugs make you lose your composure. JME.

 

[Wendigo4]

According to this site (& others)
Autotrader - page unavailable (link works, page down to bottom)

in CA vehicle plates transfer when a car is sold. In my state (NC) that's not true. Here, although annual replacement "sticker" fees are required, as long as it's in good shape and remains readable, the plate itself can be reused for up to 10 years before mandatory replacement. It's not a choice to replace it after 10 years-- the annual registration letter makes that quite clear! And it's not 10 yrs on the new car, but 10 years total new and old car(s) usage combined. In CA the plate goes with the sold car. So when HP sold each of the 3 Porsches she supposed owned, a different plate should have gone with each of the sales. (Even with tag transfer, that's one reason it's expensive to buy and sell cars frequently. New registrations cost money even with existing tags.) Anyway, none of the Porsche plates could legally be put on the RR. The only exception in CA is for specialty or personalized plates as they those belong to the owner.

So if a plate photographed on the RR truly traces back to a Porsche, and it wasn't a personalized or specialty plate, it surely sounds like something hinky was done per CA law. OTOH, if the plate number was located in non-DMV database and was associated with Heidi at one point and now tracks back associated with a Porsche, that makes perfect sense. It's on a Porsche HP sold.

I can't imagine a legit reason to photograph the RR with the plate from another car. It's not a legal or even quasi-legal "short-cut" because the RR couldn't be registered to her with the wrong plate. (If the used RR came from a dealer, usually the dealer does the work of transferring stuff, at least in my state. They charge a fee for that but I don't think the fee is optional for a dealer.) And the owners of the new Porsche likely would have a heck of a time registering their used Porsche without the plate it was supposed to come with. So I'd think the plate on the RR was its plate at the time of the photograph. BUT that plate could have been replaced since the photo was taken if the old plate became unreadable or was stolen or lost. HP also could have changed a personalized plate to a standard one or vice versa.

JMO

True, the plates stay with the car in CA for life of vehicle, with an exception for personalized plates, they stay with the owner of the Personalized plates not with the vehicle.

 

[slowpoke]

Doesn’t this statement sound like Heidi has been there at H+F before, not just this once: JMO

Friend says this in the video: “We have confirmed that there was several staff who knew her, recognized her, recognized her dog.”

If it was just this one time, you’d think she would have used the word the staff “saw” her. But she used the word “knew” her. JMO

JMO as we still are not positive Heidi was inside H+F, I believe.

New footage shows California mother Heidi Planck soon before she went missing

 

[Knox]

not all drugs make you lose your composure. JME.

Agree. I mean what would we be expecting to see on that video, it's seconds long. I wish we could see the raw footage, were the two clips edited for time?

I've come full circle in this case, don't know what to think anymore. Except I'm not as convinced as previously, that Heidi's disappearance has anything to do with her job or her ex-husband.

 

[annpats]

Doesn’t this statement sound like Heidi has been there at H+F before, not just this once.

Early on in this case, I thought she must have known someone who lived there. Either a business acquaintance, a social acquaintance or a dealer.

Maybe the person she visited was a mix of all 3....?

Or maybe she wasn't meeting ONE person, but several.

However, I don't think she was just buying drugs, because then there would be no need to go up to the apartment. A 'deal' could've been done in the car, or anywhere in LA.

Plus, I'm sure the owner of the apartment doesn't really want to deal drugs from his own home and receiving visitors all day at a high security complex. It's not a good look with the neighbours and the building owners won't like the illegal activity.

So, I'm going back to social or business acquaintance.

MOO.

 

[annpats]

JMO as we still are not positive Heidi was inside H+F, I believe.

Well, she MUST have been inside because her dog didn't go in, up to the elevator and on to the 29th floor by itself.