• #15,421
Megyn Kelly is reading from the paywalled Daily Mail article in the clip below, and she mentions this, from the article: NG was due to meet a group of friends to watch the church service online together. She says that the alarm was raised when NG didn’t join them. It’s not clear to me whether this was an online gathering or not but it helps explain the part that some people have been questioning, if true.

 
  • #15,422
Do we think the family was advised not to pay?

I think the family have been told the kidnap for ransom was not legit.

That being the case, I think some amount should be deposited by FBI - it'll add an opportunity to trace.
 
  • #15,423
Really? Why is one of the community rules "victim friendly"?

>>"Always show respect for victims and their families. No victim blaming or insensitive speculation."

I've seen all manner of breaking of this rule in this thread.
Perhaps you should take this up with a Mod? Other posters here cannot answer your question, we don’t play that role?
 
  • #15,424
Yeah...there is a lot to suggest AG and SIL are involved in this and if you can't at least acknowledge that you could be in for a rude awakening when arrests are finally made
Not only that but statistically people ARE killed within their social and familial circles. It’s naive to not consider that. LE no doubt are keeping those stats in mind.

No one here wishes ill to AG or TC. But it’s disingenuous to pretend that matricide & family money greed/bad relationships don’t exist.
 
  • #15,425
That's not what I'm talking about. There are loads of posts suggesting the family was directly involved! I've been following this thread closely. It's disgusting and breaks WS community rules.
Maybe I'm confused about the community rules. "Victim blaming" to me means "the victim and their family deserved it" or "NG shouldnt have been at home at 2am!"

I'd find it challenging to post on a website called Web Sleuths and be told I can't suggest family members could never be suspects. That would fly in the face of crime statistics.
 
  • #15,426
Please let’s not do a countdown to the ransom on this forum. The pain of this family is not a spectator sport.
I get the sense everyone feels there will be some big moment or development at 5PM. Highly unlikely...
 
  • #15,427
Correct we don't know for sure but so far no one has been able to find one.
There is usually a lag before unsealed documents hit the public portal where you are going to see them. Some documents are under seal for a time, so you aren't going to see those documents until the seal is released and they are made public. Given the current sensitive ongoing investigation, it's likely any/all documents in this case are under seal.
 
  • #15,428
I’m surprised (or not surprised) that they’re allowing people to do that given how many times they keep returning to the property for evidence.
Sometimes perps return to the crime scene pretending to observe or pay respects. They like to connect to the investigation. Same with the victim's funeral.
 
  • #15,429
  • #15,430
DBM because Trish's post a few back address what I was going to post.
: )
 
  • #15,431
Do we think the family was advised not to pay?
FBI leaves it up to the family but its pretty standard "knowledge" that without POL you don't pay a ransom.
 
  • #15,432
Really? Why is one of the community rules "victim friendly"?

>>"Always show respect for victims and their families. No victim blaming or insensitive speculation."

I've seen all manner of breaking of this rule in this thread.
Direct quote from Tricia


Let me address this.
There is nothing normal about this case. The son-in-law may have been the last person to see Nancy alive. The sheriff has not cleared anyone, and he has also stated there are no “prime suspects” at this time.

Because no one has been cleared, discussion is allowed. However, it must be done using initials only.

The reason is simple. If someone is discussed as a possible suspect and their full name is repeated over and over, it follows them forever. Google does not forget. Using initials helps protect innocent people from long-term harm if they are ultimately not involved.

This situation is unprecedented for Websleuths. We are dealing with a kidnapping in which a family member was reportedly the last person to see Nancy. Shutting down the discussion of the people closest to Nancy and those who last saw her would effectively end the thread.

We are doing the best we can to balance open discussion with protecting innocent people. It is not a perfect system, but ultimately, we are a true-crime discussion forum, and when law enforcement has not cleared anyone and has not named a prime suspect, discussion must be allowed—carefully and responsibly.

Tricia
 
  • #15,433
This is what I have been wondering. It’s very odd there is no description.

If the clothing she was wearing at dinner was in the hamper, surely AG would be able to verify that. And perhaps indicate “she generally wore yellow flannel nightgown/ blue silk pajamas/etc.”

If her dinner time clothing was not in the house, indicating she hadn’t changed ~10pm, that’s a different story. Did she generally stay up late fully clothed? Etc
Exactly this 👏
 
  • #15,434
That's not what I'm talking about. There are loads of posts suggesting the family was directly involved! I've been following this thread closely. It's disgusting and breaks WS community rules.
I have made a post that explains things more clearly. We have been announcing to use initials only. Here is the latest post that hopefully clears things up once and for all.
 
  • #15,435
No, sorry. That doesn't give us permission to do it.

It does, fortunately or unfortunately. I am of the belief that her source was incorrect, but Tricia said early on that she would allow it due to AB's history of trying to be fair and accurate in her reporting.

JMO.
 
  • #15,436
Yeah...there is a lot to suggest AG and SIL are involved in this and if you can't at least acknowledge that you could be in for a rude awakening when arrests are finally made
Question for you: did you suspect them before or after Ashleigh Banfield announced on her podcast that she had a source in LE tell her that TC was the prime suspect / POI? I don't take issue with people being suspicious, but it seems to me like the notion of AG / TC being dircely involved took off like wildfire only after Ms. Banfield's declaration.
 
  • #15,437
Then all investigations are victim blaming, as statistically it is your family and friends that are most likely to commit a crime against you, and that's where LE and media always look first.

The last people seen with the missing person are the daughter and son in law.. The investigators are obviously looking at that and since they haven't publicly excluded them speculation will run rampant. For those innocent it sucks, I get it.That's "web sleuthing". It is what it is.

What further complicates this case is we really don't know what happened. If there was an actual abduction, if there was another initial crime, if the ransom angle is an unrelated opportunistic scam. It just is still in essence a missing person. The investigation has shed no definitive light on these issues yet, and have no obligation to the public. Again, it is what it is.
Agree. Victim blaming is more like im going to blame the Iowa students for not locking the back door. Or blaming their moms for not doing something. These relatives are not victims just yet until a perp has been named or until they have been ruled out. Once LE says, "AG, SG and TC" have been cleared, then they havent. Its a process. Its an examination which is critical as it should be. Taking someone's word for it is neither scientific or reasonable. You do not know the family dynamics. You are basing on your own experiences with families and many of us have family members, who... i wouldn't be shocked if involved in something like this. Think about "high functioning drug addict step brother" or whoever. I have people in my family not above this 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬, so why would I assume her family is above it?
 
  • #15,438
  • #15,439
Thank You. EveryONE is entitled to their opinion whether we like it or not and as long as it follows the rules here it shouldn't be an issue. If there was 'bashing' of the family Tricia and the mods would definitely address it.

MOO
So agree and opinions and personal thought patterns are very important in the big scheme of things. I’m an admittedly a VERY a black-and-white thinker, and very stubborn at times to be persuaded from my original thoughts. There have been so many thoughtfully, written out comments posted here that allow me to see my stubborn perspective completely different.
 
  • #15,440
No. I won't be gaslit. People have been suggesting the family was involved and that breaks WS community rules:

>>"Always show respect for victims and their families. No victim blaming or insensitive speculation."
It was stated multiple times by mods that as long as LE has not cleared anyone, any suspicions referring to family by initials only would be allowed
 
Chapter 1/4

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
88
Guests online
3,512
Total visitors
3,600

Forum statistics

Threads
644,532
Messages
18,819,154
Members
245,383
Latest member
rickc120124
Top