Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #23

[Cherry]

Maybe her hair was chopped off as a disguise for those three weeks. Also her baseball cap w a hoodie is a possible look prior to coming home. Not a good look this, but very memorable imo.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I’m not the person you were talking to but just to butt in, lol, I think his “plea”
To Sherri was taking the case to the media and putting it on blast. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And if he didn't go and put himself in the media while she was missing what would have happened?

Oh yeah, what always happens. Accusations that he was responsible for her disappearance (and even more likely she was dead and he did it) because any time a married woman goes missing and her husband doesn't push searching for her, doesn't push that he is innocent, then that is exactly what happens. The entire time Sherri was missing Keith was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Hindsight doesn't change that.

 

[Jethro4WS]

I wonder if perhaps some past traumatic event happened in Sherri's life around the holidays? Maybe parents' divorce? It looks to me like around this time every few years, she is triggered to either act out or else plan some happy event. Either way, it's something that brings attention to her, positive or negative. From the turn of the century, she spent 7 years acting out, then 7 years planning weddings and pregnancies and raising babies to toddlerhood. Maybe at that point it became an issue of, what now? Nothing is about me anymore...

Are you thinking the "seven year itch"?

 

[MarisaS1985]

I keep wondering about Sodium Pentathol, actually in regard to several cases I follow. Is that still offered as a truth serum for those who volunteer to do so? Or is it illegal now? I have no idea. TIA

I quickly googled it as I knew it was a fairly dangerous drug, was expecting more info on the health risks but this popped up in Wiki. Several of the drugs are ones I recognize have lingering effects for several hours to days, and are in the benzo family (like Valium). Could you imagine if they gave this drug to someone who had an underlying condition that was lied about or undiagnosed and it caused major problems? I would think it would have to be administered in a hospital setting which would be an expensive approach with high risks.

Subjects questioned under the influence of such substances have been found to be suggestible and their memories subject to reconstruction and fabrication. When such drugs have been used in the course of investigating civil and criminal cases, they have not been accepted by Western legal systems and legal experts as genuine investigative tools.[SUP][2][/SUP] It has been suggested that their use is a potential violation of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (the right to remain silent).[SUP][3][/SUP][SUP][4][/SUP] Concerns have also been raised internationally through the European Court of Human Rights arguing that use of a truth serum could be considered a violation of a human right to be free from degrading treatment,[SUP][5][/SUP] or could be considered a form of torture.[SUP][6][/SUP] It has been noted to be a violation of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_serum

 

[Cannonball3804]

Are you thinking the "seven year itch"?

Not really, just thought it was kind of interesting that the first 14 years of this century were evenly divided into bad, then good. But more importantly, the fact that something momentous happens or must happen with her every couple or 3 years, and roughly the same time of year (reminds me a bit of Seasonal Affective Disorder).

But you're right - they had been married about 7 years when she disappeared. But rather than some specific number of years, I'm thinking more of the end of a phase. What is a narcissist to do when the era of singlehood, engagement, wedding, and having babies ends?

 

[CoolJ]

Well her high school friend disappeared in late August '98

 

[JaimeInLA]

Does anyone know if dogs were used to track her scent right after she disappeared? I am really curious if she disappeared (if the scent trail ends) where the phone was located. Or if she was ever in that location at all. We might not know the results from the dogs, but I'm hoping they were used. Does anyone know?

 

[Rott Mom]

I'm not to sure to what to post without getting a To - so I will say :fence:

 

[neesaki]

I quickly googled it as I knew it was a fairly dangerous drug, was expecting more info on the health risks but this popped up in Wiki. Several of the drugs are ones I recognize have lingering effects for several hours to days, and are in the benzo family (like Valium). Could you imagine if they gave this drug to someone who had an underlying condition that was lied about or undiagnosed and it caused major problems? I would think it would have to be administered in a hospital setting which would be an expensive approach with high risks.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_serum

Yes, the points that are raised here are why it’s no longer used as a “truth serum “ . Thank you for googling. Still.....

 

[MsFacetious]

Yes, the points that are raised here are why it’s no longer used as a “truth serum “ . Thank you for googling. Still.....

I wish there was something that WAS effective.
All those guys that spent years in prison while innocent could have been cleared on day 1.
With ALL the technology I can't believe there isn't something to 100% determine a lie vs. the truth.

 

[bears10]

And if he didn't go and put himself in the media while she was missing what would have happened?

Oh yeah, what always happens. Accusations that he was responsible for her disappearance (and even more likely she was dead and he did it) because any time a married woman goes missing and her husband doesn't push searching for her, doesn't push that he is innocent, then that is exactly what happens. The entire time Sherri was missing Keith was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Hindsight doesn't change that.

But that wasn’t my point at all. My point was that I think he went to the media the way he did to put pressure on her to come home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[natsound]

They never asked Sherri to take a polygraph. IMO maybe they don’t need Keith to take one bc they have a hunch where Sherri was, and/or who she was with. Whether or not they believe her, I am sure they are treading very lightly due to the DH case and the backlash LE got from accusing her very early on that she was lying.

I’m not saying SP isn’t a victim. I think it’s very plausible that whatever happened the day she disappeared wasn’t what she expected or planned on, and she doesn’t want to tell the truth because it may not shed her in the best light. Just an opinion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It could be that they don't care to have KP take another polygraph because they've ruled him out as a suspect, and he has obviously closed ranks with his wife and continues to drink the kool aid she's serving up.

 

[natsound]

But how could it be a plea to Sherri when it wasn't in the press until after she was found? The reporter's ability to write a sentence, in his own words, that flows perfectly with the quoted parts after has little to do with whether or not the sentence is true or something Keith actually said. The reporter might have asked a question such as "did you think she would be home for Thanksgiving" to which Ken's answers would also "flow" and make sense. Again, this was ONE unquoted line in ONE article in a UK paper known for sensationalist journalism in which the reporter never even spoke to Keith. No other papers reported that Keith promised his kids that SP would be home for Thanksgiving. I don't believe we should be giving it much weight. JMO.

I'm with you on this. KP's assertion that he promised his kids she would be home by Thanksgiving, and all claims from others that KP said that, came after SP re-appeared on Thanksgiving. We don't know if he really said it to his kids before she was found. It sure makes him sound good though. Fits in with the super mom/perfect family/fairy tale narrative.

 

[natsound]

BBM. I think you're being generous. [emoji8]JMHO, but KP changing his story to include prior calls/texts, when his first statements to 911 and the press just included the find my phone, isn't conclusive to me. I'd love LE to directly make a statement on the phone records.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I feel the same way. I am not confident that KP called her before using the find my iPhone app. Matt Guttman's tweet saying "of course I asked him. Some things just don't make the cut" didn't cut it for me. Any reporter could say that.

 

[Hope4More]

Well LE has the option of asking them to and KP has volunteered. Why do you think LE have not asked them to do additional (or first) polygraph tests? Could it be that LE knows info we don't know and they don't see any value in administering polygraphs to the Papinis? Could it be that LE actually do believe them as they have stated to the press? :thinking:

LE is on record about this - they didn't ask her to take a lie detector test because she is a victim.

They are also on record as saying the case is "weird," which is difficult to argue against. It sure remains just that. The fact that they've acted on multiple search warrants suggests, as do their plain words on the matter, that they believe SP was the victim of crimes committed against her, however inexplicable the motivations for those crimes seem to be.

SP's behavior since being returned convinces me that she was & remains deeply traumatized by what happened, including becoming what neighbors describe as an almost never seen outside recluse, and the incident in which neighbors heard her screaming 20 minutes before Keith likely turned up the volume on their TV to drown out the sound of her meltdown.

I also accept LE's conclusion that Keith wasn't involved. What they've seemingly left open is the possibility SP might well have an least some inkling of her kidnapper's motivations. That seems pretty plausible, IMO.

 

[Cannonball3804]

LE is on record about this - they didn't ask her to take a lie detector test because she is a victim.

They are also on record as saying the case is "weird," which is difficult to argue against. It sure remains just that. The fact that they've acted on multiple search warrants suggests, as do their plain words on the matter, that they believe SP was the victim of crimes committed against her, however inexplicable the motivations for those crimes seem to be.

SP's behavior since being returned convinces me that she was & remains deeply traumatized by what happened, including becoming what neighbors describe as an almost never seen outside recluse, and the incident in which neighbors heard her screaming 20 minutes before Keith likely turned up the volume on their TV to drown out the sound of her meltdown.

I also accept LE's conclusion that Keith wasn't involved. What they've seemingly left open is the possibility SP might well have an least some inkling of her kidnapper's motivations. That seems pretty plausible, IMO.

Respectfully, I don't know that we've ever had a true picture of how social she was before this. What if she was pretty reclusive already? And anyway, just because a happens, and then b happens, that doesn't mean that a caused b. Acting traumatized after the disappearance doesn't mean that the disappearance caused the trauma. And we don't know that Sherri was screaming that night at her house.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I'm not the person you asked, but this article might be of interest to WSers in general about lies that LE may tell to suspect:

Ten (10) Ways Police Can Legally Lie to You
https://www.njmoorelaw.com/10-ways-police-can-lie-to-you

These are understandable lies LE can do but I have never heard nor seen LE telling anyone they passed a polygraph when they did NOT. I am sure many here watch ID and LE puts a lot of weight into who does and who does not pass their polygraph. Usually they will take them off the list of possible suspects if they pass. While polygraphs are rarely entered into court cases because both sides have to agree...........the police relies heavily on the polygraph results of anyone.

That just doesn't seem like something LE would do. LE is very mindful of the words they choose and they would never want to say someone passed a polygraph and then later have to come back and tell the public it was a lie.

I think the most common sense conclusion is he did pass his polygraph and showed no deception or untruthfulness. IMO

It is very common I think for LE to tell someone their poly was inclusive or they detected deception even if its a lie. LE did this to Ruth Lunsford in Jessica Lunsford's case and also to Steve Greone when his children were kidnapped by JED but neither one of them were guilty of any wrongdoing whatsoever, and neither of them had anything to do with the kidnapping of the children.

From your link: This is the reason they lie about polygraphs.

(3) Police can give fake tests to "prove you're guilty"

"You failed the polygraph."
"You failed a chemical test."

Consider the following true story:
A suspect requested a polygraph test, and the police hooked the suspect up to a fake machine. During the questioning, the suspect denied any involvement in the crime, then the police show the defendant a fake graph from the fake machine, and tell the suspect that they know he is lying. The suspect thereafter admits being present at the scene of the crime - The court ruled the defendant's admission is a voluntary and admissible confession. People v. Mays (2009) 173 Cal App. 4th 1145.


JMO

 

[Cannonball3804]

Last night I was watching an old 20/20 about the. Christine Paolilla case. LE developed sketches of the two suspects and then didn't release them for a long time. A few years went by and then they released the sketches. They said afterward that it was to "generate conversation" and "produce tips". And it accomplished itts purpose.

Hopefully the sketch release in the SP case will pay off just as it did in that case.

 

[gitana1]

But how could it be a plea to Sherri when it wasn't in the press until after she was found? The reporter's ability to write a sentence, in his own words, that flows perfectly with the quoted parts after has little to do with whether or not the sentence is true or something Keith actually said. The reporter might have asked a question such as "did you think she would be home for Thanksgiving" to which Ken's answers would also "flow" and make sense. Again, this was ONE unquoted line in ONE article in a UK paper known for sensationalist journalism in which the reporter never even spoke to Keith. No other papers reported that Keith promised his kids that SP would be home for Thanksgiving. I don't believe we should be giving it much weight. JMO.

You're right. I didn't realize he hadn't made that statement until AFTER she was released.

 

[gitana1]

I keep wondering about Sodium Pentathol, actually in regard to several cases I follow. Is that still offered as a truth serum for those who volunteer to do so? Or is it illegal now? I have no idea. TIA

I don't know. I doubt it would be legal though. You can't force people to incriminate themselves and it's a barbiturate so they'd be under influence even if voluntarily but then would lack the capacity to stop the conversation.

Interesting fact - they carry it on planes for people who go crazy. The shoe bomber was given it.

And if he didn't go and put himself in the media while she was missing what would have happened?

Oh yeah, what always happens. Accusations that he was responsible for her disappearance (and even more likely she was dead and he did it) because any time a married woman goes missing and her husband doesn't push searching for her, doesn't push that he is innocent, then that is exactly what happens. The entire time Sherri was missing Keith was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Hindsight doesn't change that.

True.

LE is on record about this - they didn't ask her to take a lie detector test because she is a victim.

They are also on record as saying the case is "weird," which is difficult to argue against. It sure remains just that. The fact that they've acted on multiple search warrants suggests, as do their plain words on the matter, that they believe SP was the victim of crimes committed against her, however inexplicable the motivations for those crimes seem to be.

SP's behavior since being returned convinces me that she was & remains deeply traumatized by what happened, including becoming what neighbors describe as an almost never seen outside recluse, and the incident in which neighbors heard her screaming 20 minutes before Keith likely turned up the volume on their TV to drown out the sound of her meltdown.

I also accept LE's conclusion that Keith wasn't involved. What they've seemingly left open is the possibility SP might well have an least some inkling of her kidnapper's motivations. That seems pretty plausible, IMO.

No. It doesn't suggest they believe her at all. It suggests they're good investigators.

They had a missing woman. And a phone found neatly coiled. And a very dramatic husband who was "angry" when she turned up missing. Mm

They investigated. They served warrants for everyone's electronics and records. Those records led them to michigan after discovering she was trying to meet a man. Those records show she had female names for male contacts in her phone.

They continued investigating. Then came the thanksgiving miracle. And a crazy story about a motive-less abduction and torture by two masked, Latina bandits. Who somehow dragged her into a van, drove with her over a hundred miles, spent three weeks with her in close proximity, engaged in hand to hand combat with her and then drove her back, all while remaining totally masked and not giving away any identifying info of any kind, including their location.

Since then LE has released random and odd info that seems designed to create implications about her, not designed to find two, mysterious, masked Latina bandits- she cut her foot in a physical fight but no evidence of that was found. She was trying to meet up with a mysterious Michigan man which is why they investigated him. The case is "weird". She can't remember anything about her actual abduction or any identifying info. Her hair wasn't shorn. It was cut shoulder length. The FBI "wanted" poster makes
no mention of any crime or suspects. Instead it states they may have "info" about the disappearance. Etc.

LE's actions do not support their belief in her or her story.