Theories: Why Would Elizabeth kill Gabriel?

[pittsburghgirl]

If these are zealots convinced that Logan is a danger to the child, I think there is still hope. Hundreds of kids disappear into the underground with their birth parents, with LE looking for them, too.

 

[Boo Scout]

If these are zealots convinced that Logan is a danger to the child, I think there is still hope. Hundreds of kids disappear into the underground with their birth parents, with LE looking for them, too.

I agree. I've thought about this over and over, and I think that if you really want to hide, it's not that difficult. If there are people willing to go to such great (and highly suspect) means to get a child, I believe they could then fly under the radar if they really prepared to do so. Also, if they're paying for a child, it suggests they have some means, and money often makes anything you're trying to do easier.

If he's being hidden by an underground network, I believe they are well set up and thought out and hiding people is what they do.

I am hopeful, and continue to believe, that she did NOT kill him.

 

[RainyGirl]

I believe an illegal, underground "adoption" occured (facilitated by the Smiths) and that Gabriel is most likely being hidden in Mexico....possibly being passed off as a little girl. San Antonio is just too close to the border for this not to be a possibility. My husband is a native of Mexico, and before he legally came here to the US and began a citizen, he witnessed some very illegal activities....many of which were sanctioned by the so-called "police"!! Not to say there aren't a vast majority of LE in Mexico that are honest and dutiful public servants....just that there is a different culture with some people that says "money talks". Of course the same is true in all countries, I suppose. All I know is that my hubby's take on the whole thing----he really thinks that Gabriel is in Mexico. We just want him back with his Daddy Logan!! JMO.........

 

[nitasch]

I am late following this case, but I am finally caught up (read every article, video, threads etc) and I have to say, I have changed my mind several times.

I always hate to believe a mother could hurt their own child, but we all know that happens all too often. BUT, I am leaning toward the adoption, not a murder.

EJ clearly wanted to give the boy up for adoption, for two reasons;

1. to hurt his father LM
2. To rid herself of the burden she considered the baby to be and start her new life. It seems she never really bonded with the baby, and he was more of a tool for her to keep LM around. Now that LM is no longer around (in a relationship), the baby is of no use to her beyond hurting LM.

Why isn't she talking? I think her grandfather explained it in an interview. She was told by her atty that she is facing 20 years with the charges that have been filed against her right now......even if she told the police where the baby is, these charges will not change. So in her mind, she is already looking at 20 years, why would she give up the location of the baby when it will not benefit her, but WILL BENEFIT LM.

As far as the potential adoptive couple.... this case is not getting a lot of attention. I saw it on the national news just a couple of times, and now nothing. Others have stated in other threads how the places they take fliers have never heard of the case, and that is IN TX!!

If the adoptive parents took the baby out of TX, I don't think they feel real concerned that they are going to get caught. If one is desperate enough to adopt a baby on the underground market, then they are willing to risk hiding this baby to keep him. JMO

 

[kappy50]

On HLN just now, Ms. Nance said Tempe PD is wrapping up their case. Now it goes to SA taking up the investigation. Boy this case, is making me dizzy...It was mentioned earlier that SAPD wan't to talk w/ EJ and her attorney said no. Crazy question I know, but can they (attorney) really do that ???

 

[nitasch]

On HLN just now, Ms. Nance said Tempe PD is wrapping up their case. Now it goes to SA taking up the investigation. Boy this case, is making me dizzy...It was mentioned earlier that SAPD wan't to talk w/ EJ and her attorney said no. Crazy question I know, but can they (attorney) really do that ???

Yes...sadly. Look at some of the other cases going on, it is pretty common actually. Right to remain silent.

 

[BeanE]

On HLN just now, Ms. Nance said Tempe PD is wrapping up their case. Now it goes to SA taking up the investigation. Boy this case, is making me dizzy...It was mentioned earlier that SAPD wan't to talk w/ EJ and her attorney said no. Crazy question I know, but can they (attorney) really do that ???

Yes, LE can only talk to Eliz's attorney, not directly to her, because she's invoked her right to remain silent. So, LE would talk to her attorney, then the attorney would consult with Eliz and advise her, then the attorney would go back to LE and give them the answer.

 

[NewMommy09]

Yes, LE can only talk to Eliz's attorney, not directly to her, because she's invoked her right to remain silent. So, LE would talk to her attorney, then the attorney would consult with Eliz and advise her, then the attorney would go back to LE and give them the answer.

She probably won't agree to speak with them until/unless she decides to try to plea. IMO

 

[BeanE]

SAPD Chief William "Bill" McManus
Video with clips from news conference Feb 9, 2009

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MuZI_4sRpM[/ame]

Partial transcription by me:

"We do remain hopeful that baby Gabriel is alive. We are, however, conducting both a missing persons investigation as well as a homicide investigation.

Homicide investigators believe that aspects surrounding the disappearance of baby Gabriel involve elements of a possible homicide."

 

[Concernedmomarizona]

SAPD Chief William "Bill" McManus
Video with clips from news conference Feb 9, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MuZI_4sRpM

Partial transcription by me:

"We do remain hopeful that baby Gabriel is alive. We are, however, conducting both a missing persons investigation as well as a homicide investigation.

Homicide investigators believe that aspects surrounding the disappearance of baby Gabriel involve elements of a possible homicide."

Thanks BeanE....I probably have missed something but why does this video keep showing a Motel 6? Was she at a Motel 6 on Christmas Day? I thought it was Homegate and a Quality something hotel?

 

[smart blonde]

I can't help but wonder...

If Elizabeth was male, and destroyed the apartment, including tearing up/ cutting up the baby clothes- would she have been taken more seriously?

If Elizabeth was a man, and took off with Gabriel, hiding him at the Smith's- would law enforcement have been so lenient, allowing the baby to immediately be returned to her- if she were male?

If Elizabeth were a man, but still had the same history of violent rages and destruction of property, would people have been quicker to call her out on her domestic violence?

And if Elizabeth was male, would it be so hard to believe and accept that 'he' may have killed Gabriel?

If she were a man, who took off out of state with the baby during a custody battle, and then texted and called 'his' girlfriend that 'he' murdered the baby, with everyone knowing 'his' history of violent rages?

I think if Elizabeth were a man, the landfill search would have started over a month ago.

My opinion only, of course.

 

[Kamille]

I can't help but wonder...

If Elizabeth was male, and destroyed the apartment, including tearing up/ cutting up the baby clothes- would she have been taken more seriously?

If Elizabeth was a man, and took off with Gabriel, hiding him at the Smith's- would law enforcement have been so lenient, allowing the baby to immediately be returned to her- if she were male?

If Elizabeth were a man, but still had the same history of violent rages and destruction of property, would people have been quicker to call her out on her domestic violence?

And if Elizabeth was male, would it be so hard to believe and accept that 'he' may have killed Gabriel?

If she were a man, who took off out of state with the baby during a custody battle, and then texted and called 'his' girlfriend that 'he' murdered the baby, with everyone knowing 'his' history of violent rages?

I think if Elizabeth were a man, the landfill search would have started over a month ago.

My opinion only, of course.

I agree that the landfill search should have started immediately, in fact they should have followed all the trash trucks from the area right away and searched them for evidence like they did in the Somer Thompson case. I can't help but wonder, however, if the fact that this involved a person, and as you've noted a woman no less, from out of state and there were some LE logistics to be sorted out as to who was responsible to take the case right from the beginning.

IMO, AZ LE and the FBI should have handled the whole Smith/illegal adoption angle while SA LE should have conducted a homicide investigation simultaneously, if for no other reason than to collect evidence from that hotel room and to possibly rule out her text to LM.

MOO

 

[BeanE]

I agree that the landfill search should have started immediately, in fact they should have followed all the trash trucks from the area right away and searched them for evidence like they did in the Somer Thompson case. I can't help but wonder, however, if the fact that this involved a person, and as you've noted a woman no less, from out of state and there were some LE logistics to be sorted out as to who was responsible to take the case right from the beginning.

IMO, AZ LE and the FBI should have handled the whole Smith/illegal adoption angle while SA LE should have conducted a homicide investigation simultaneously, if for no other reason than to collect evidence from that hotel room and to possibly rule out her text to LM.

MOO

BBM. Hi Kamille Are you saying you think LE didn't collect evidence from the hotel room?

I saw another post a few days ago somewhere in here that implied that the poster thought the trash from the hotel room hadn't been kept.

I'm wondering if I missed something. Is there a news article or something saying that items from the hotel room that should have been kept, weren't kept?

TIA

 

[Kamille]

BBM. Hi Kamille Are you saying you think LE didn't collect evidence from the hotel room?

I saw another post a few days ago somewhere in here that implied that the poster thought the trash from the hotel room hadn't been kept.

I'm wondering if I missed something. Is there a news article or something saying that items from the hotel room that should have been kept, weren't kept?

TIA

Hi BeanE :wave:

I'm sure they have all of the evidence of what was left in the room on the 27th but I'm talking about all the trash that should have been picked up daily from that room and disposed of by the housekeeping staff.

I do think I recall reading that the dumpsters from all three hotels involved (the third one being the motel 6 where she parked the car only) had been checked right away after that text, which is why I don't think they believe they are going to find Gabriel at the landfill from the hotel dumpsters at least. But that's not to say that she didn't use one somewhere else and I guess they realize now that this possibility has to be ruled out. So now I suppose they have to go through all of the trash from all of the dumpsters in an area that they believe she may have travelled in that 24 hour period from the time of the last date stamped picture until the time of the video of her heading to the bus station.

So if they think there may be other evidence to be found from the hotel garbage, then the dumpster(s) may have been emptied sometime during that week. If it wasn't, then SA LE really dropped the ball by not isolating at least the hotel dumpsters right away.

 

[danisisa]

I was under the impression that the she never let the housekeeping in. They would of cleaned it after she left or checked out....Which she never checked out. So,,the room probably got cleaned between the night of the 26th or morning of the 27th. Remember, sHe only paid for a week. the 26th was a Sunday....I think she took all of the incriminating stuff with her

 

[Kamille]

Housekeeping was apparently coming at least to the door on a daily basis. She told the babysitter not to let them in so she knew they would be coming when the babysitter was there. It is possible that EJ didn't let them in either but she may have passed them her garbage and dirty towels or at least left them outside the door. I would imagine she would have wanted them to bring clean towels daily at least. I believe the babysitter said that the woman from housekeeping did at least drop off towels when she told her she wasn't supposed to let her in.

And now that I think of it, there was a strange comment apparently from the housekeeping staff that they thought she had left on the 26th but they weren't sure. Was that because it was the only day that someone wasn't in the room when they showed up to block them and they were actually able to get into the room to clean it?

I don't think you can outright refuse to allow housekeeping access to your room by telling the front desk people to keep them away. I don't think any hotel would just let someone stay in a room for a week without any checking by housekeeping. But if you were in the room when they showed up and told them you didn't need anything cleaned and you were passing them dirty towels and garbage, I would imagine they'd be okay with that.

 

[dnrslucky1]

I worked in a Motel. The one I worked at, had a lot of business people that would stay for an extended time. Some would request no housekeeping at the front desk, so the room number was not assigned to house keeping.

If a Do Not Disturb sign was on the door, that is what it meant, you did not knock, you did not call, you did not leave towels!

There is a dead bolt on the inside of every room, no one, can enter that room with the dead bolt locked, not even maintenance.

If she never had house keeping clean her room during her stay, they would remember.
House keeping was already talking about who was gonna be the unlucky one to have to clean it when she left!

Anything left in the room would have been bagged and put in lost and found.

 

[dnrslucky1]

Snipped from Kamille's post.

And now that I think of it, there was a strange comment apparently from the housekeeping staff that they thought she had left on the 26th but they weren't sure. Was that because it was the only day that someone wasn't in the room when they showed up to block them and they were actually able to get into the room to clean it?

Most Hotels do not have 24 hour house keepers on staff, most leave by 4PM. I would say there was not a Do Not Disturb sign, house keeping knocked and no one answered so they used a key and went in to clean.

If personnel items were in the room, baby clothes, car seat, etc. They would have cleaned the room and thought nothing of it. The next day, however, if it looked the same, still clean, beds made, towels not used, then it would have been questioned.

 

[NewMommy09]

Housekeeping was apparently coming at least to the door on a daily basis. She told the babysitter not to let them in so she knew they would be coming when the babysitter was there. It is possible that EJ didn't let them in either but she may have passed them her garbage and dirty towels or at least left them outside the door. I would imagine she would have wanted them to bring clean towels daily at least. I believe the babysitter said that the woman from housekeeping did at least drop off towels when she told her she wasn't supposed to let her in.

And now that I think of it, there was a strange comment apparently from the housekeeping staff that they thought she had left on the 26th but they weren't sure. Was that because it was the only day that someone wasn't in the room when they showed up to block them and they were actually able to get into the room to clean it?

I don't think you can outright refuse to allow housekeeping access to your room by telling the front desk people to keep them away. I don't think any hotel would just let someone stay in a room for a week without any checking by housekeeping. But if you were in the room when they showed up and told them you didn't need anything cleaned and you were passing them dirty towels and garbage, I would imagine they'd be okay with that.

BBM, Just my :twocents:.
Before I moved to TX, I stayed at weekly rate hotel for 3 weeks. I did not ask the front desk to not have housekeeping come. But usually my brother and I were sleeping when they came to the door and we didn't even bother to get up and answer it. We did get fresh towels from the front desk and let them in to clean the room once a week. But the hotel did not have a problem with that.

 

[impatientredhead]

BBM, Just my :twocents:.
Before I moved to TX, I stayed at weekly rate hotel for 3 weeks. I did not ask the front desk to not have housekeeping come. But usually my brother and I were sleeping when they came to the door and we didn't even bother to get up and answer it. We did get fresh towels from the front desk and let them in to clean the room once a week. But the hotel did not have a problem with that.

Absolutely, I don't like people in my space if avoidable and I regularly tell housekeeping we don't need the room serviced and I will call when I need something. They don't care. You are paying the same amount for the room and they usually pay the maids on a per room rate. I tip housekeeping generously to make up for the money I know they didn't get having me decline their services.