CA CA - Karlie Lain Gusé, 16, Mono County, 13 Oct 2018 #2

[bwt42]

This is a strange case where the family is admittedly filtering information for the public. They are making decisions about what needs to be shared and care little if they change facts that they feel are unimportant. Unfortunatly it just makes people suspicious and they appear to have zero self awareness about that.

The only other discrepancy is where Karlie's phone was left. It seems a relatively insignificant fact (I would totally understand why the parents would pick it up to look for info and not put it back exactly) but the parents and bf seem adamant about where it was with the bf saying it was in the bedroom and the parents saying it was in the kitchen.

What is the significance of who remembered correctly where the phone was?

 

[rob525]

Just wondering, how did the boyfriend know where the phone was? He wasn't there. Or am I missing something? Did they not find her phone until later after the boyfriend arrived at the home?

 

[Vail]

So let's do some What If.

What if Karlie left the house that morning, walked down her street where she was seen by a neighbour, to the corner where she was seen by another. She did not have her phone or belongings, and was not dressed for the weather. What happened next?

A. She is picked up by someone.
- How was the meeting coordinated?
- Who picked her up?
- Where did they go?

B. She continues walking until the roads turn to desert a short while later, and perishes.

- How long could she last?
- What was the temp that morning and afternoon?
- What would the natural path be for someone, let's say attempting to just walk forward, be? Would they drift slightly southward? What major landmarks are on the horizon if walking that direction?
- Did anyone monitor bird activity in the area during the weeks following?
- What other factors can attribute to dispersal? Coyotes, weather events, new construction?

C. She terminally burrows somewhere closeby.
- What are the options? Manholes, culverts, wells or mines?

 

[kaykay543]

Is there an MSM source for that? The SM used the "very skinny" reference about an interview the neighbor gave but I have not been able to find it. She went out of her way to mention that and it strikes me more of the filtering behavior I mentioned in my previous post. Especially as she is no doubt very aware of social media commentary on the case.

Its on the Dr Phil show episode one right in the beginning of the episode after she admits she lied on the Dateline interview

 

[kaykay543]

Just wondering, how did the boyfriend know where the phone was? He wasn't there. Or am I missing something? Did they not find her phone until later after the boyfriend arrived at the home?

He went to Karlie's house that morning when SM told him she was missing. He insists the phone was on a stand next to her bed.

Not sure what difference it makes other than to show that maybe SM is not being truthful again.

 

[nyvictoria]

Deleted

 

[nyvictoria]

What is the significance of who remembered correctly where the phone was?

Maybe nothing but it’s one more discrepancy to add to the growing list.

 

[SuziQ]

I agree. Some posters don't want it to be Karlie. jmo

Some posters wonder why the SM changed the clothing description. And some posters wonder what's up with the lying.

 

[SAMS]

Deleted ugh

 

[bwt42]

Some posters wonder why the SM changed the clothing description. And some posters wonder what's up with the lying.

I wonder about this also but I don't know why you would copy my post about people not wanting the walking girl to be Karlie. Don't see the connection.

 

[Beagle]

So let's do some What If.

What if Karlie left the house that morning, walked down her street where she was seen by a neighbour, to the corner where she was seen by another. She did not have her phone or belongings, and was not dressed for the weather. What happened next?

A. She is picked up by someone.
- How was the meeting coordinated?
- Who picked her up?
- Where did they go?

B. She continues walking until the roads turn to desert a short while later, and perishes.

- How long could she last?
- What was the temp that morning and afternoon?
- What would the natural path be for someone, let's say attempting to just walk forward, be? Would they drift slightly southward? What major landmarks are on the horizon if walking that direction?
- Did anyone monitor bird activity in the area during the weeks following?
- What other factors can attribute to dispersal? Coyotes, weather events, new construction?

C. She terminally burrows somewhere closeby.
- What are the options? Manholes, culverts, wells or mines?

D. She continued to the end of the road and was picked up by a stranger?

E. She never left the house alive?

What became of the footprints that were supposedly found by the dad?

 

[rob525]

Maybe she thought, for whatever reason, that she had to get back to were the party was held. Couldn’t find something and thought she left it? Possibly still under the influence of whatever she ingested the previous night? Decided to hitchhike back to town?

 

[missingm]

Its on the Dr Phil show episode one right in the beginning of the episode after she admits she lied on the Dateline interview

Yes, but she was referring to an interview that the neighbor gave. I did see one yesterday on my phone. In it he says the woman was tall and slender, but even those words aren't quoted. Not sure if this is the interview or not. Also note that the timeline can be later for the sighting.

Search continues for California teen Karlie Gusé

Eddy said that sometime between 6:30 a.m. and 6:45 a.m., he saw a tall, slender female with long hair walk by. “She was looking up, looking around at the sky,” he said.

BBM

 

[missingm]

What is the significance of who remembered correctly where the phone was?

It is a discrepancy that is strange to insist on. Maybe a friend called her phone to make sure she got home OK. Why didn't you answer the phone? Instead of saying they ignored it, just tell them it was in the kitchen so they didn't hear it. Possibly more filtering or altering facts. Not to conceal but to reduce any questions that "aren't important."

I don't think that this implicates SM in anything. There are people who will instinctively change a story for no reason or to simply protect themselves / family. They can lose children as well.

Early on she was worried about the implications of drug use by Karlie. She was reluctant to go to the ER. She took herself out of the bedroom overnight. She tried to make decisions about what facts were important and what weren't. I don't think it implicates her, but it does make her statements less reliable.

 

[bwt42]

It is a discrepancy that is strange to insist on. Maybe a friend called her phone to make sure she got home OK. Why didn't you answer the phone? Instead of saying they ignored it, just tell them it was in the kitchen so they didn't hear it. Possibly more filtering or altering facts. Not to conceal but to reduce any questions that "aren't important."

I don't think that this implicates SM in anything. There are people who will instinctively change a story for no reason or to simply protect themselves / family. They can lose children as well.

Early on she was worried about the implications of drug use by Karlie. She was reluctant to go to the ER. She took herself out of the bedroom overnight. She tried to make decisions about what facts were important and what weren't. I don't think it implicates her, but it does make her statements less reliable.

Thanks. Wasn't aware a big deal was made over it.

 

[Vail]

D. She continued to the end of the road and was picked up by a stranger?

E. She never left the house alive?

What became of the footprints that were supposedly found by the dad?

D is covered by A and E is what we are trying to disprove with this line of inquiry (or show how all other scenarios are unlikely and exhaused)

 

[Jim_M]

Yes, but she was referring to an interview that the neighbor gave. I did see one yesterday on my phone. In it he says the woman was tall and slender, but even those words aren't quoted. Not sure if this is the interview or not. Also note that the timeline can be later for the sighting.

Search continues for California teen Karlie Gusé

RSBM BBM

~~~snip~~~

"Karlie took nothing with her when she left home — not even her cellphone or glasses. She was wearing only sneakers, a white T-shirt and gray sweatpants, even though the temperature was in the low 40s."

~~~snip~~~

"After Karlie went missing, Zac and Melissa spent two hours driving around White Mountain Estates and the surrounding desert.

“Because of what happened the night before, the thought was she went on a walk to clear her head,” said Zac.

But when Zac phoned Lindsay, she urged him to call the police, so he dialed 911. That afternoon the Mono County sheriff’s office launched a search and rescue operation."

~~~snip~~~

"Melissa believes Karlie was abducted. Zac concurs but also remarked, “It just doesn’t make sense that your worst nightmare would show up at that time.”"

~~~snip~~~

"Zac acknowledges that, given Karlie’s recent troubles, it’s possible she ran away.
“Maybe’s (sic) there’s things she kept from us. Who knows?”"

Many thoughts come from reading this article IMO.

First, if KLG was cognizant about putting on sweats, a t-shirt, and sneakers, would she not also grab a jacket?

Second, did she need her glasses only for up-close? If she needed them for distance, how did she plan to look up at the blurry stars?

Third, ZAC has introduced the angle that KLG may have kept things from them, by painting this 'possible runaway' theory into the mix. This, after saying his first thought was she went for a walk. And then spent two hours trying to find her.

Oh dear KLG, I hope you are alive, and safe, and warm... wherever you might be.

 

[interestedincases]

I'm came into this thread late and don't have anything to add. There is so much confusion and changing stories, it's just hard to form a good opinion. It reminds me of the Brandon Lawson case where everything changed and there wasn't a CLEAR story to go off of. So, instead, everyone focuses on trying to figure out the stories versus being able to focus exactly on what happened and the possible conclusions to help find him.

For Karlie's case, I see two options.

1) Something did happen to her with SM and dad. If that's the case, where could they have taken her to between the time she was picked up and the time they reported her missing (that's a long time to dispose of someone).

2) Karlie did leave the house on her own. If SM wouldn't change her story so much and tell the truth of what they really know, then you could narrow down the timeframe for sure and determine how far she could have gotten on her own within that time.

I feel for sure SM and dad are hiding something..........whether they did something to Karlie OR they somehow participated in her reaction (giving her other meds once she was home). The changing stories tell you something is up, but to what extreme? And that's what is so sad to me, if they were just honest upfront, no matter what backlash they would get from people, they may have found their child by now. I'm sure when someone goes missing, your first thought is not that they won't ever come home, it's that they are hiding out at a friends, etc and will be found. Maybe SM initially lied because she assumed Karlie would be found right away and their "secret" would be safe. But then, if that's the case, just admit that and tell the truth so people can focus on finding her!

This child deserves to be found, whether she expired in the desert, or someone killed her. BM deserves answers, I just cannot imagine the heartbreak.

 

[missingm]

If she wasn't picked up and she did walk to Hwy 6 the Fish Slough area just 2.5 miles west is the most likely place she would have been. She would have been out of the line of sight within the first mile. So many places to hide there. She may have had a favorite spot.

If she didn't head towards Hwy 6 then she could be in another home or shed in the neighborhood. There are mines in the mountains but it would have been a tough task to get up that far without a vehicle.

Of course if she hid under her bed her parents and brothers would be gone by 7:45 and she would have had nearly two hours to go somewhere.

 

[MsMarple]

From I_M_H_O on Thursday:

~~~"I just keep coming back to this exchange, probably because IMO, it’s so representative of much of what we’ve heard from ZG and MG:

“‘Melissa, you told NBC, the next morning that at 5:45 a.m., you did your usual routine of opening up the kids’ doors, saying good morning, getting them ready for school -- that sort of thing. Did you – she was still in bed at that time. Did you go back and lay down?’ Dr. Phil asked Melissa on the show which aired on March 25, 2019.

‘No. That – the Dateline NBC?’ Melissa answered. ‘Yeah, that was a false story. Because I wasn’t – it was a lie about checking in on Karlie. Because it was in the beginning, and I didn’t know what to say and – I shouldn’t have even done the interview.’

Karlie’s father Zachary was also on set with Dr. Phil.

‘It was too early. You don’t know what to do,’ Zachary told Dr. Phil. ‘There’s no handbook for this, man.’” (BBM)
Sixteen-year-old Karlie Gusé missing after vanishing from California home

For whatever it’s worth, here are my interpretations of the parents’ statements:
“Yeah, that was a false story”: “I made it up. So what? Why are you even asking about it?”

“Because I wasn’t ... in on Karlie.”: “It was just about checking in on her. It’s a non-issue. What’s the big deal about lying?”
I’m very curious as to why she stopped herself after the “Because I wasn’t ....”

“Because it was ... done the interview.”: The statement makes no sense, IMO. What difference does it make that it was soon after Karlie disappeared? There is no logic to what she says here, IMO. Why does she regret doing the interview, while she apparently doesn’t see a problem with the fact that she lied?

“It was too ... what to do” and “There’s no handbook for this, man”: Non-answer, IMO.

Why not just give a straight answer?

Michael Chambers: Missing since March 10, 2017
If you have a tip, call Klein Investigations at 409-729-8798
Alexandra Brueger: Fatally shot on July 30, 2016
If you have a tip, call MSP at 800-MICH-TIPS
inmyhumbleopinion, Thursday at 7:43 PM
#1145"~~~

______________________________
So, we need to ask ourselves (or not, free choice here):

What else has been lied about in this case?? IMHO we really do not know. Does LE know?

Yeah, it only confuses things when the parents aren't forthcoming. I assume - or at least I hope - they were upfront and truthful with LE and are only fudging to the public for reasons known only to them. If so then it does hinder the public if they want people to search for Karlie but if LE has the straight story that's probably more important.

Still, it makes no sense that SM would post all those live videos, with the huffing and water gulping and at the same time release false information but I guess she had her reasons. I don't know.

In the meantime it's ominous that Karlie hasn't been seen or heard from. It seems like it's coming down to a few options, none good. She may have made it to hwy 6 and was picked up by a stranger with bad intentions. Or she was picked up by a friend but that would mean she communicated with them beforehand and we've heard nothing about outgoing calls other than the SM's calls to the boyfriend. Or she wandered out into the desert and perished.

IMO she's either dead or hiding somewhere and due to the amount of time since her disappearance the odds are against her being somewhere safe. It's possible the early searches missed her completely - we've certainly seen that before in cases here. I think if she was trafficked we'd have heard from her by now. It's a big risk for someone to try and keep her out of the public's eye since there are so many "throwaway" kids to prey upon.

All MOO.