Ransom Note and Calls to the Boss

[Synaptic Cliff]

Well, I'm assuming the "company vehicle" was driven by Adam, and the camry was driven by her. I really don't see her just taking off in AB's "company vehicle" whenever she felt like it, much less using it without AB's permission. So let's assume, for the moment, that this is the case. Cadaver dogs hit on both the Tahoe and the camry, so we know that something that contained the scent of human decomp was in the Tahoe. We also know that blood evidence was recovered from the console of the Tahoe, and if the old mattress was disposed of in a dumpster other than the one behind the house, it wouldn't have fit in the camry. Also, how did the new mattress get to the house? Not in the camry, I'd venture to guess. So, if AB is completely clueless in all this, EB would have had to taken his "company vehicle" many times, at least 2 of which might have been to haul something very noticeable like mattresses. It just defies logic to me, to assume she did all this in his "company vehicle" unbeknownst to him.

We know that EB wrote the ransom note, but we don't know WHEN she wrote it. We also don't know who put it on the car and set the fire that morning. We do know that the Tahoe was the only vehicle that had gas poured in it and contained "burnt remnants". So, if EB set this fire in order to frame AB for everything, why would she put the ransom note in HER handwriting on his "company vehicle", and then pour gas in the Tahoe (in order to either torch it, or cover the scent of decomp")? Why would she try to cover up evidence connected with the vehicle HE drove, but leave all that evidence in the vehicle SHE normally drove. Not to mention her leaving the RN in her own handwriting?

It just makes more sense to me to imagine that, if anyone was trying to set someone up to take the fall for everything, it was AB trying to set EB up, and not the other way around.

JMO

ETA: Either way, though, there is no way I'm ever going to believe that AB didn't have the first clue what happened to his daughter. There is just overwhelming evidence that leads me to believe he HAD to know. Again, jmo.

I agree.. I was just contemplating this same thing! It seems possible that AB is trying to frame EB... After all, she's the one in jail and he's walking around free. JMO

 

[Clue Hopper]

According to the warrants this is the reason EB gave for the ransom note. I think it gives a little bit of insight as to how her mind works.

On 10/11/2010 EB admitted to fabricating the ransom note that was left on the Tahoe, stating it was due to her anger with MC. The interview was conducted by Agent McB of the NCSBI and SGT. BP of the HPD. She was charged with Felony Obstruction of Justice on that date.

 

[april_showers]

i know i'm not explaining myself well here, my reasoning behind their writing the note, and the fact that it all had to do with the bosses daughter:

zahra's gone. they need a way to have LE believe that they had nothing to do with it. (lightbulb! dim as it was ) to write the note,say it was the bosses daughter, put it on the bosses vehicle, all of which occurs at the (rented house) of the boss.

start a fire to get the FD there,who will in turn then call LE once the fireman spies the note.
LE will then be the ones to discover that Z is missing. (AB and EB then fake hysterics).

they didn't do the "omg---let me go check on zahra", because at no time did they want to be the ones to find her 'missing', it had to be LE and it had to be a kidnapping gone wrong.

if they were going to do that, offer up "let's check on zahra"------there would have been no reason for the fire, or the note, or getting LE to their house, to begin with.

they could have just done the 'hey how ya' doin'. my daughters missing" at any time.

This is entirely plausible, IMO, and could definitely be where things began to unravel. Perhaps she/they were so nervous about drawing suspicion to themselves that they neglected to even mention Zahra at all. (Not in the the "omg, check on OUR daughter" sense, but just in a more basic/innocuous "yeah, it's just the three of us who live here..." sort of way). I doubt that house had a bunch of childs's toys strewn about the living room, or drawings on the fridge, etc. So LE has no idea of the existance of Zahra and is just thinking they're dealing with this odd little "gothic" couple. Perhaps, in such a small town, they're familiar with EB, or have dealt with her from a few years back, and know her kids are all grown. So there's LE with no reason to even think there's a child in the house, and there's EB nervously fuming because, for some odd (to her) reason, no one's thinking there's a child there.

 

[netsleuther]

Well, I'm assuming the "company vehicle" was driven by Adam, and the camry was driven by her. I really don't see her just taking off in AB's "company vehicle" whenever she felt like it, much less using it without AB's permission. So let's assume, for the moment, that this is the case. Cadaver dogs hit on both the Tahoe and the camry, so we know that something that contained the scent of human decomp was in the Tahoe. We also know that blood evidence was recovered from the console of the Tahoe, and if the old mattress was disposed of in a dumpster other than the one behind the house, it wouldn't have fit in the camry. Also, how did the new mattress get to the house? Not in the camry, I'd venture to guess. So, if AB is completely clueless in all this, EB would have had to taken his "company vehicle" many times, at least 2 of which might have been to haul something very noticeable like mattresses. It just defies logic to me, to assume she did all this in his "company vehicle" unbeknownst to him.

We know that EB wrote the ransom note, but we don't know WHEN she wrote it. We also don't know who put it on the car and set the fire that morning. We do know that the Tahoe was the only vehicle that had gas poured in it and contained "burnt remnants". So, if EB set this fire in order to frame AB for everything, why would she put the ransom note in HER handwriting on his "company vehicle", and then pour gas in the Tahoe (in order to either torch it, or cover the scent of decomp")? Why would she try to cover up evidence connected with the vehicle HE drove, but leave all that evidence in the vehicle SHE normally drove. Not to mention her leaving the RN in her own handwriting?

It just makes more sense to me to imagine that, if anyone was trying to set someone up to take the fall for everything, it was AB trying to set EB up, and not the other way around.

JMO

ETA: Either way, though, there is no way I'm ever going to believe that AB didn't have the first clue what happened to his daughter. There is just overwhelming evidence that leads me to believe he HAD to know. Again, jmo.

BBM

Could this suggest that the Tahoe was not driven but could have been accessed by someone who had the scent of decomp on them and they have taken something from the center console?

 

[tlcya]

According to the warrants this is the reason EB gave for the ransom note. I think it gives a little bit of insight as to how her mind works.

On 10/11/2010 EB admitted to fabricating the ransom note that was left on the Tahoe, stating it was due to her anger with MC. The interview was conducted by Agent McB of the NCSBI and SGT. BP of the HPD. She was charged with Felony Obstruction of Justice on that date.

her anger. her plot, her ransom note. What the heck happened to this child? I am still waiting so patiently for charges. So patiently.

I agree she seems to be the impetus behind the ransom note directed at MC.

From some accounts, AB was ready to try and leave EB (AY). From other accounts, the boss, MC was trying to be helpful to AB. I think, EB worried that MC was assisting AB in hiding a bit of money from each pay, in order to gather funds for taking Z and getting the heck out of this situation. This is ALL MOO. I have no link to back it. Just me and my little own thoughts. That being the case, say AB returns from work one day and Z is gone. EB, who allegedly has a history of abusive behavior towards her own children and previous spouse(s). EB informs AB that she is aware that AB has been trying to figure a way out. A way to get away from her. He is informed that Z is safe somewhere and that he must participate in this farce in order to see her alive and safe again. He cooperates, hoping to get his hands on Z and run for his and her life. Unbeknowst to him, Z has already been killed and disposed of.

The night of the 911 calls comes. Eb sets a fire, sets up the ransom note, and then the FD comes. AB, nervous, freaked out, goes off script. He does not alert to his daughter, supposedly sleeping inside. Does not make a fuss about Z whatsoever. Thus FD and LE and boss leave. EB spends the day harrassing AB into making next 911 call. He makes a total flub of the whole conversation. It is not his script. When asked things not anticpated by EB and not scripted/prepared for, he is awkward, and yet, he wants LE there. He wants to please EB and get his kid back.

Either that or he is just as much a as she is and they should both pay. I still belive that he needs to be held accountable for the abuse Z suffered at EB's hand. As to his "abusive" behavior here stateside, to me, sounds as if the menacing, etc. were at her directive and who knows if that behavior was coerced in some way by her. I am flumoxed. I hope like crazy that the DA has way more than we do and is building a case against ANYONE involved in this little gal's demise.

Again, just ruminations on my part. Could be completely off base. Totally willing to admit that.

 

[LCoastMom]

i know i'm not explaining myself well here, my reasoning behind their writing the note, and the fact that it all had to do with the bosses daughter:

zahra's gone. they need a way to have LE believe that they had nothing to do with it. (lightbulb! dim as it was ) to write the note,say it was the bosses daughter, put it on the bosses vehicle, all of which occurs at the (rented house) of the boss.

start a fire to get the FD there,who will in turn then call LE once the fireman spies the note.
LE will then be the ones to discover that Z is missing. (AB and EB then fake hysterics).

they didn't do the "omg---let me go check on zahra", because at no time did they want to be the ones to find her 'missing', it had to be LE and it had to be a kidnapping gone wrong.

if they were going to do that, offer up "let's check on zahra"------there would have been no reason for the fire, or the note, or getting LE to their house, to begin with.

they could have just done the 'hey how ya' doin'. my daughters missing" at any time.

Doesn't the FD normally do a wellness check on anyone in the residence when they get a call? I know the first footage I watched there were images of a roaring blaze at the intro, but the report says a small or little yard fire -

I'm guessing here that it was immediately obvious that this fire was arson (in part thanks to gasoline all over the cars) so wouldn't the FD have wanted to rule out the 3rd family member - what if she had been the one who started the fire and burned herself, so she was hiding in her bedroom? I realize this was not possible - just trying to figure out why she wasn't checked by the FD/PD at 5...