Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #22

[natsound]

http://www.timesunion.com/local/art...Rachael-Mattice-made-up-abduction-8404789.php

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I can only think of misdemeanor charges too.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

My guess is there's an arrest coming up.

Holy cow!! An arrest? I was puzzled by the more info coming.

I just hope innocent people who fit those descriptions are not targeted.

:seeya:

1st BBM: Now that would be :fireworks:

JMO but I will not be surprised if it is ... one of the P's ...


2nd BBM: I agree ... I hope they don't arrest a certain type of women just because they fit SP's "profile" ...

:moo:

 

[DakotaMayi]

Was Sherri ever told by these women why they abducted her? I’m sure LE has asked her and I’m curious what her answer was because LE says they are still trying to figure out the “why.” We know that LE has said that nothing indicates that the purpose was sex trafficking. She told them she was not sexually assaulted. There was no ransom demand. What does that leave?

Revenge? For what? Surely, if they held her for three weeks to teach her a lesson, they would have told her what she had done to anger them (or their employer). Otherwise, why go to all this trouble?

Proving themselves worthy of joining a group or to show loyalty? That seems far-fetched for adult women IMO. And why Sherri?

Being punished by someone powerful and told to kidnap someone? Doubtful. Who was supervising them? Again, why Sherri?

Mentally ill? Since the abduction defies logic, this may be the most likely reason.

Am I missing something?

Bottom line...these women took a great risk scooping Sherri up in broad daylight, driving her over 100 miles, holding her for three weeks and dumping her near an interstate. AFAIK they didn’t even collect the reverse ransom offered (in Spanish IIRC).

So what was the end game here? I’m sure this is what LE is trying very hard to figure out.

Exactly. As a good sleuthed here said to me once, there are 3 motives for things like this, money (they didn't ask for ransom) sex (nope) revenge... revenge for?? ... If they wanted revenge they would have made damn sure she knew what she had done to wrong them. Nope. No way. Not buying it.

 

[Liadan]

I don't mean to make too much of the marriage deal, but this is not true, either, so I feel I have to set the record straight. You cannot shop around for a flexible priest who will perform a Catholic marriage. It does not happen. The Catholic church has a hierarchy and priests are held accountable ultimately in Rome. So what Rome says stands. A divorced person of any religion cannot marry in the Catholic church without an annulment. There is no flexibility on things like this in the Catholic church because marriage is a sacrament to them.(VMMKING)

Thanks VMMKING but I am very not Catholic and had to be married in a Catholic church otherwise my M-in-Law would not go to heaven. It happens. You sign a waiver to go to classes to be Catholic and no problem.

 

[bluesneakers]

Self delete

 

[bears10]

I don't mean to make too much of the marriage deal, but this is not true, either, so I feel I have to set the record straight. You cannot shop around for a flexible priest who will perform a Catholic marriage. It does not happen. The Catholic church has a hierarchy and priests are held accountable ultimately in Rome. So what Rome says stands. A divorced person of any religion cannot marry in the Catholic church without an annulment. There is no flexibility on things like this in the Catholic church because marriage is a sacrament to them.(VMMKING)

Thanks VMMKING but I am very not Catholic and had to be married in a Catholic church otherwise my M-in-Law would not go to heaven. It happens. You sign a waiver to go to classes to be Catholic and no problem.

Then Sherri and her ex either got an annulment, or she lied to the church about being previously married. Which wouldn’t be a stretch considering she lied on her wedding blog with KP that she’s never lived with a man before, even though she had already been married. Then again, maybe she really didn’t live with another man before KP and her first marriage was a sham. So if she didn’t get an annulment, she either lied to the church or her first marriage was a sham- Either situation would be telling. JMO

Anyway it doesn’t really matter what religion they are. A previous poster only asked bc they were wondering if the papinis were members of bethel church, which according to the VI, they are not.

 

[Deleted member 158085]

I don't mean to make too much of the marriage deal, but this is not true, either, so I feel I have to set the record straight. You cannot shop around for a flexible priest who will perform a Catholic marriage. It does not happen. The Catholic church has a hierarchy and priests are held accountable ultimately in Rome. So what Rome says stands. A divorced person of any religion cannot marry in the Catholic church without an annulment. There is no flexibility on things like this in the Catholic church because marriage is a sacrament to them.(VMMKING)

Thanks VMMKING but I am very not Catholic and had to be married in a Catholic church otherwise my M-in-Law would not go to heaven. It happens. You sign a waiver to go to classes to be Catholic and no problem.

Are you saying you were divorced and were allowed to marry in the Catholic church without an annulment? Because that's what we were talking about, but it's not clear that's what you are saying here. Here you seem to be simply stating what normally happens when a Catholic and non - Catholic marry in the Catholic church. But that wasn't the issue.

I'm confused.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 158085]

Then Sherri and her ex either got an annulment, or she lied to the church about being previously married. Which wouldn’t be a stretch considering she lied on her wedding blog with KP that she’s never lived with a man before, even though she had already been married. Then again, maybe she really didn’t live with another man before KP and her first marriage was a sham. So if she didn’t get an annulment, she either lied to the church or her first marriage was a sham- Either situation would be telling. JMO

Anyway it doesn’t really matter what religion they are. A previous poster only asked bc they were wondering if the papinis were members of bethel church, which according to the VI, they are not.

That's all very interesting.

I often wonder why some people lie about all sorts of meaningless crap. I don't understand it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[mommylicious]

Throwing in my .02 on the marriage in the Catholic Church issue. My husband and I were married in the Catholic Church 9 years ago. I'm sure he must have gotten an annulment of his first marriage but I don't remember it being a big deal at all since they weren't married in a Catholic ceremony. No lying, no shopping around, no weird circumstances.

 

[Laughing]

Throwing in my .02 on the marriage in the Catholic Church issue. My husband and I were married in the Catholic Church 9 years ago. I'm sure he must have gotten an annulment of his first marriage but I don't remember it being a big deal at all since they weren't married in a Catholic ceremony. No lying, no shopping around, no weird circumstances.

OT: check that a copy of the annulment order/decree is in your safe deposit box. If your husband becomes incapacitated you want no other claimant to next-of-kin; in the event of his death the same. Yeah, some people are like that.

 

[bears10]

OT: check that a copy of the annulment order/decree is in your safe deposit box. If your husband becomes incapacitated you want no other claimant to next-of-kin; in the event of his death the same. Yeah, some people are like that.

I would have to believe legal documents would rule over a church annulment and it’s documents, or lack there of. If he is divorced, and remarried, his ex is legally no longer next of kin. His current wife is.

 

[Laughing]

I would have to believe legal documents would rule over a church annulment and it’s documents, or lack there of. If he is divorced, and remarried, his ex is legally no longer next of kin. His current wife is.

I recommend holding both documents. Especially if a Catholic hospital is nearby.

 

[bears10]

I recommend holding both documents. Especially if a Catholic hospital is nearby.

Seems dramatic but if you say so. I don’t think there’s a need to worry OP like that. It’s none of our business.

 

[2Hope4]

Unless her ex is a POI or suspect, I don't care what religion they are or aren't, nor whether their marriage is 'official' per Catholic rules. IMO, it doesn't matter. But to each their own.

I keep thinking of the saying 'stranger than fiction', and that's true sometimes. While at one point I thought this just can't be real, I don't know anymore, and apparently neither do LE as they haven't dismissed the case, and they haven't charged anyone...

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

I recommend holding both documents. Especially if a Catholic hospital is nearby.

rbbm
What do you mean?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I think members are stretching things that the Papini's have done something wrong simply by being married in a Catholic church. I have no idea why it's relevant at all.

I'm giving this family the benefit of doubt at this time. The posts that I have read here have not pushed me to believe that this is a hoax. In fact most of the ones that imply that don't have enough weight for me to believe it's true. A few have given me pause to think if it's possible. My thoughts are that it's possible but not likely with what I have seen so far.

So that means I'm on the fence for now. JMO

 

[Pamela_Brewer]

To refresh our memory, when Sherri came back...

"The next day, before dawn, Keith missed a phone call on his cell phone from a number he didn’t recognize."

"It's very emotional. And, ‘I love you, I love you, I love you, Oh my God, you're here. You're back. Where are you?"

http://abcnews.go.com/US/sherri-pap...erious-disappearance-search/story?id=43930023

THOUGHTS considering the new info?
MOO

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[JaimeInLA]

Was Sherri ever told by these women why they abducted her? I’m sure LE has asked her and I’m curious what her answer was because LE says they are still trying to figure out the “why.” We know that LE has said that nothing indicates that the purpose was sex trafficking. She told them she was not sexually assaulted. There was no ransom demand. What does that leave?

Revenge? For what? Surely, if they held her for three weeks to teach her a lesson, they would have told her what she had done to anger them (or their employer). Otherwise, why go to all this trouble?

Proving themselves worthy of joining a group or to show loyalty? That seems far-fetched for adult women IMO. And why Sherri?

Being punished by someone powerful and told to kidnap someone? Doubtful. Who was supervising them? Again, why Sherri?

Mentally ill? Since the abduction defies logic, this may be the most likely reason.

Am I missing something?

Bottom line...these women took a great risk scooping Sherri up in broad daylight, driving her over 100 miles, holding her for three weeks and dumping her near an interstate. AFAIK they didn’t even collect the reverse ransom offered (in Spanish IIRC).

So what was the end game here? I’m sure this is what LE is trying very hard to figure out.

Does anyone know which direction from her home she was dropped off in? Was it 100 miles to the west? Michigan man was rumored to be in San Francisco that week for a medical conference. When she found between her home and San Francisco?

 

[JaimeInLA]

I'm starting to think this was an involuntary disappearance, but she's sticking to the false story of the two female kidnappers because she doesn't want to go to jail for whatever she was involved in that got her into this predicament in the first place.

The withdrawal of cash that day (right?).....

The half wrapped present.....

The neatly coiled ear buds.....

If Sherri was involved in buying and/or selling drugs. Maybe the mailboxes were her usual meeting spot and as she saw the vehicle coming toward her for the transaction, she took her earbuds out and wrapped them around her phone, not knowing she was going to be forced into the vehicle because she'd ticked them off. Maybe she was even supposed to bring that cash on her walk, but forgot it, and it was the the straw because she had a history of not paying/making excuses for not paying??

The cash she withdrew but did not take really stumps me.

I have been wondering about drugs too. A few clues:

1) <modsnip>
2) Living in an area that is infested with meth
3) She stole money from her own father and he called the police on her
4) She broke into her sister's house, and again, the police were called
5) A history of self harm (per mom's police report)
6) Rapid weight loss during the three weeks she was gone
7) Manufactured image of the perfect wife and mother, which is very common among addicts
8) People who are high on meth sometimes have superhuman strength and could do things like brand themselves or hit their own face with a hammer and not feel pain like a sober person would
9) <modsnip>
10) she did not work, but her kids were in full-time daycare. Why? Did Keith not trust her to care for them when he wasn't around?

 

[1&2&3]

OT: check that a copy of the annulment order/decree is in your safe deposit box. If your husband becomes incapacitated you want no other claimant to next-of-kin; in the event of his death the same. Yeah, some people are like that.

This is so true! You never know who will come from under the woodwork to make a claim on a death!

Upon my brother's death, his ex of 30+ years ago, who cheated on him and was the cause of the divorce, showed up at the VA office to put a claim in! He had many friends working in this office, with his childhood buddy in charge of it. Boy, did they have a good belly laugh that day!!