Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #18

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #321
Excellent point. It's interesting nobody has been putting forth the ST theory for Stacey Smart. '
Hell: it's interesting that the "mysterious donor" hasn't taken the money he earmarked for SP, which wasn't used, and make the same offer for her. <modsnip>

Maybe the mysterious donor is someone who is connected to the Papini family? Maybe that money is now going towards SP's care, a new home, security, etc.
 
  • #322
National Enquirer is NOT an approved MSM source.

This is the same rag that at one time screamed "Baby Born With Wooden Leg".

Ah, geez, the Men in Black use it! : )
 
  • #323
I was really referencing "fed infrequently". If she was fed infrequently and drugs were only placed in her food (which is how I interpreted the post), I don't see how she would be dependent on anything. Infrequent use - not dependent.

I could have misread the post, but it sounded like SP's perception was drugs in the food.

Do you mean the VI Lake16? The way I understood it was he or she suggested it was possible drugs had been put in SP's food, not that SP said this.
 
  • #324
  • #325
That is a good point. But even if she didn't lie pictures were still shared of her kids, and the abductors are still out there. She wasn't the one to share the pictures though, and if she lied she probably lied to everyone IMO.

Her family knew of her ordeal, it's hard to believe they weren't aware of threats against her or the children. The kids names were not release until they shared those RECENT pictures. JMO
 
  • #326
They have no description of the 2 women with guns as well.

So why not say that a latino male was involved as well. But i didn't see him.

Maybe SP left out any possible male involvement as a signal to let people know she wasn't, in fact, raped. Because the first place people are going to go when they know a male is involved is to rape, and maybe she couldn't deal with people thinking that, especially if it's not true....so she let people believe her captors were female, only.

Whoknows.Justatheory.
 
  • #327
Got it. i don't think she was drug dependent on release. Perhaps it's one reason she got so thin...she perceived they were drugging her food?

I've been thinking about this and I know it's never easy to put ourselves in someone's situation, but when I am stressed or anxious I have a lot trouble eating. It might have been a combination of them underfeeding her and her being unable to eat enough to keep from losing so much weight.

She might also have gotten sick from whatever they did give her - vomiting and diarrhea can contribute to weight loss. And of course either of those could have been symptoms of the stress she was under.

Dehydration might have contributed to her weight loss too.
 
  • #328
the reason it is so important, the branding I mean, is that if SP was branded "all over her body" then it further discounts ST. IMO
 
  • #329
They could've held a gun to her head and said drop your phone. Instead she slowly and gently put it down because she was scared.

I thought so, until I heard Keith saying to MG on 20/20 that Sherri didn't went out without a fight. So, she gently laid the phone; then fight two armed women?
 
  • #330
Are you saying that lies are being told about the appearance of the abductors in order to protect them?

Now I'm not sure what you mean.
 
  • #331
To be clear, your theory has two women routinely driving females around in chains, bound to something in the car with bags over their heads? One traffic stop, fender bender, or red light scream, and their business is done. Not to mention being murdered by a ticked off pimp when he finds out.

I think it is closer to O's razor JMO

Isn't that what SP describes as happened to her whenever she was in a car? I am taking my theory from what she said happened.
 
  • #332
  • #333
  • #334
I thought so, until I heard Keith saying to MG on 20/20 that Sherri didn't went out without a fight. So, she gently laid the phone; then fight two armed women?

If she didn't have a weapon to defend herself then yes. If she actually had her gun with her then no.
 
  • #335
  • #336
Maybe SP left out any possible male involvement as a signal to let people know she wasn't, in fact, raped. Because the first place people are going to go when they know a male is involved is to rape, and maybe she couldn't deal with people thinking that, especially if it's not true....so she let people believe her captors were female, only.

Whoknows.Justatheory.

Or perhaps male involvement wasn't mentioned because of what that would lead us to conclude. I can't even let my mind go there. The thought of that is too painful on top of everything else that was done to that poor woman.
 
  • #337
If so, then why a day or two after her release they shared new pictures of her kids, along with their names and ages? If someone threaten to hurt my kids, you bet I won't be sharing recent pictures of them and more info!

This tells me that SP's children must not have been threatened by whoever did this.
 
  • #338
  • #339
  • #340
the reason it is so important, the branding I mean, is that if SP was branded "all over her body" then it further discounts ST. IMO

Right, but it doesn't say this anywhere else. So it's hard to trust Hollywood Life over the other sources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
127
Guests online
2,569
Total visitors
2,696

Forum statistics

Threads
632,144
Messages
18,622,666
Members
243,034
Latest member
RepresentingTheLBC
Back
Top