Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #24

[natsound]

The point is that LE has been consistent. Obviously, these investigators (not idiots and not, in my experience, gullible) have done their level best to poke holes in her story. That it still holds up, a year later, after an exhaustive investigation, is significant. Like it or not, it really is. In fact, finding no reason not to believe her, given the nature of this investigation, probably says more about the veracity of Sherri’s story than a simple “we believe her,” because her story has obviously withstood their intense scrutiny.

I don't think this is the case at all. SP's story is not holding up. Here's what's going on, according to this expert interviewed by Newsweek:

Ken Ryan, a law enforcement expert, who worked 25 in the industry and now teaches criminology at California State University, said he was “amazed by the coincidences” and thinks the story is most likely false, but at this point police don’t have enough evidence to completely prove it.

“The thing is that they had to take this story as true and investigate it even though they were misled,” Ryan said. “I think it would be irresponsible to clear your hands of this and say it was a hoax without clearly laying out the details.”

Ryan said one of the biggest issues in this case is the two suspects. He said not only do they not meet the normal profile in a kidnapping and torture case because they are women, but since the suspects were able to get away, a crime like this should have happened again.

“In my 25 years I’ve never seen a case like this where someone was kidnapped, held captive for 20 something days then just released,” he said. “None of it makes sense.”

http://www.newsweek.com/sherri-papini-1-year-later-cops-say-details-dont-line-california-moms-700262

LE, IMO, is waiting for irrefutable evidence.

 

[natsound]

Snipped for focus and BBM

I'm thinking they are quite a bit more certain.

In addition to your excellent summary of the information released which casts doubt on her story (intentionally, IMO, they certainly knew the impression it would give the public), I would add that "no reason not to believe," with the double negative, is nowhere near what I would consider an adamant statement of belief. Linguistically, it is a very weak statement of support, and I'm guessing the statement analysis peeps would go further than that.

The main things that are telling to me...

1. KP told 911 he used the find my phone app, with no mention of calling or texting her prior.

2. Her ear buds neatly placed.

3. The over the top effort to portray her as the perfect wife and mother.

4. KP ignoring the first call thanksgiving morning.

5. MM

6: KP: “I thought about her being there, screaming my name,” when his wife was in captivity.

7. KP: the mixture of horror and elation*... My reaction was one of extreme happiness and overwhelming nausea.... filled with so much relief and revulsion... . I got nauseated just looking at her.*...

6. The lack of interest by the family in bringing her alleged kidnappers to justice.

7. The willingness to return to live in the same house, where she would have to go past the scene of her "abduction" every time she leaves the house.

Perhaps it's just me, but IMO "screaming my name" has sexual connotations. Why not simply yelling for help? Why would she scream for him specifically if she had been kidnapped and, presumably, taken where he wouldn't be able to hear her?

Someone you love has been injured, I don't care how it happened or how severe... who on earth would use words like "nausea" and "revulsion?" Has anyone here ever visited a loved one in the hospital and been "nauseated just looking at her?" And it strikes me, "nauseated just looking at her", not at her injuries.

Having been with relatives who have had severe injuries, those types of words are just mind boggling. I simply can't conceive of reacting to an injured loved one like that.

I have heard of people becoming physically sick, throwing up, upon learning of a spouse's affair.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

The circumstance that tipped the scales for me was the fact that she was returned "on Thanksgiving Day". What a Thanksgiving miracle for the brave supermom with signature blonde hair!

THAT sounds like a cheesy movie script where the hero and heroine then walk off into the sunset and credits roll. But since this is reality, not a movie, that final walk-away never happened.

 

[natsound]

I'm not sure what law says LE must sketch every suspect description they get but they certainly don't have to release the sketch if they don't believe her. JMO

Obviously, LE is not admitting publicly at this point that they don't believe her. Releasing the sketches is responsible police work until they can prove she is fabricating.

 

[RANCH]

I guess I have to agree to disagree with most here about the sketches.

I don't have any reason to believe that LE has to create and release sketches of people they know don't exist.

I also don't have any reason to believe that LE would purposely release release sketches of people that don't exist to show/prove to the public that Sherri is lying.

JMO

 

[Rayemonde]

If LE ever bring charges against SP and it goes to trial, the defence attorney would have a field day if s/he could show that LE never made any effort to find the two women that SP alleged abducted her. As it is now, LE would be able to say in court that they made every effort to find them, by releasing descriptions and sketches, but were never able to trace them or even find any sightings of them. That would help their case against SP. Jmo.

 

[Cannonball3804]

I guess I have to agree to disagree with most here about the sketches.

I don't have any reason to believe that LE has to create and release sketches of people they know don't exist.

I also don't have any reason to believe that LE would purposely release release sketches of people that don't exist to show/prove to the public that Sherri is lying.

JMO

I think maybe "know" is not the best word to use. Perhaps "believe" is better. LE can't "know" that the people in the sketches don't exist. It may be that they "believe" those people don't exist. But they can't "know" it unless they bugged SP and recorded her saying, "I made it all up."

LE has to allow for possibilities, no matter how slim. And if there is even the tiniest possibility that it happened as SP describes, then failing to publish those sketches subjects them to liability, especially given that SP collaborated with them on the sketches and knows that LE them.

 

[Tee7077]

Why do pop up ads take over my phone every time I try to open this site? It’s the only site that does this to me. Pretty terrible way run this.

 

[cattlekate]

Why do pop up ads take over my phone every time I try to open this site? It’s the only site that does this to me. Pretty terrible way run this.

It’s happening on all three browsers on my iPad. Firefox, Safari, Chrome. The fake “Congratulations!” ads. Argh.

 

[RANCH]

If Sherri is found guilty of filing a false police report to LE she would be guilty of a misdemeanor. I doubt she would even see much if any time in jail.

Making a False Report of a Crime
California Penal Code 148.5 PC

Penal Code 148.5 PC makes it a misdemeanor to make a false report of a crime to the police or other authorities. As a misdemeanor, a person convicted faces up to six months in county jail.

In some cases, the judge may grant probation with little or no actual jail time. In deciding how much jail time to impose, the judge will consider

• the person's criminal history,
• the person's motive for making the false police report, and
• the consequences of the false report (such as whether it caused an innocent person to get arrested).

https://www.shouselaw.com/false-report-crime.html

 

[RANCH]

I think maybe "know" is not the best word to use. Perhaps "believe" is better. LE can't "know" that the people in the sketches don't exist. It may be that they "believe" those people don't exist. But they can't "know" it unless they bugged SP and recorded her saying, "I made it all up."

LE has to allow for possibilities, no matter how slim. And if there is even the tiniest possibility that it happened as SP describes, then failing to publish those sketches subjects them to liability, especially given that SP collaborated with them on the sketches and knows that LE them.

BBM

I'm not sure that LE would be liable in a legal sense if they failed to do something like releasing questionable sketches.

I found this interesting.

A. No General Duty To Investigate Or To Investigate Further


In Williams v. State of California, the California Supreme Court upheld a demurrer to allegations the police conducted a negligent investigation of an accident.

22

The Court held that the "failure of police personnel to ... investigate properly, or the failure to investigate at all, where the police had not induced reliance on a promise, express or implied, that they would provide protection" does not state a claim for negligence due to the lack of duty to investigate.

https://www.cacities.org/Resources-.../2014/Police-Civil-Liability-Paper-FINAL.aspx

 

[bears10]

If Sherri is found guilty of filing a false police report to LE she would be guilty of a misdemeanor. I doubt she would even see much if any time in jail.

Making a False Report of a Crime
California Penal Code 148.5 PC



https://www.shouselaw.com/false-report-crime.html

I think the bigger issue for her would be paying back the money and any possible restitution for the cost of the search. jmo

 

[Elle*Bee]

It’s happening on all three browsers on my iPad. Firefox, Safari, Chrome. The fake “Congratulations!” ads. Argh.

I’ve only had it happen on Safari and only with this site, but clearing my cache and cookies would resolve the issue for a while. I’ve heard other people having trouble with Chrome so I switched to a few lesser known browser. No issues in the past year. (Knock wood. I’m hesitant to post the name of the browser in case spammers are watching and will think, “oh yeah, I can create pop ups for that one, too.” )

 

[kkdj]

I think the bigger issue for her would be paying back the money and any possible restitution for the cost of the search. jmo

which, I think would be separate law suits brought.

 

[RANCH]

I think the bigger issue for her would be paying back the money and any possible restitution for the cost of the search. jmo

Yes. She could be sued. What If she doesn't have a job. Garnish her husbands wages? I guess they could take community property they have. Can they take their house? I'm not sure.

 

[kkdj]

Yes. She could be sued. What If she doesn't have a job. Garnish her husbands wages? I guess they could take community property they have. Can they take their house? I'm not sure.

The runaway bride was fined, but not much imo to what was spent.
http://people.com/crime/runaway-bride-jennifer-wilbanks-where-is-she-now/

 

[bears10]

Yes. She could be sued. What If she doesn't have a job. Garnish her husbands wages? I guess they could take community property they have. Can they take their house? I'm not sure.

The judge would probably put her on a payment plan. I am totally guessing but I'd assume SP would have to prove efforts to get a job and come up with any money owed. Since they do not own the house they live in, that would be off limits jmo

 

[RANCH]

The judge would probably put her on a payment plan. I am totally guessing but I'd assume SP would have to prove efforts to get a job and come up with any money owed. Since they do not own the house they live in, that would be off limits jmo

What if she doesn't get a job? Can the judge keep increasing the amount owed until she did?

 

[bears10]

What if she doesn't get a job? Can the judge keep increasing the amount owed until she did?

I have no idea. Maybe interest would be applied, but I don't know. Restitution is a life long debt, so it would have to be paid at some point in time. I can't imagine they can live off of KPs salary only for the rest of their lives.

 

[RANCH]

I wonder if the people who contributed to the "Help Find Sherri Papini" could file a class action suit against her?

What Is a Class Action Lawsuit?

These cases differ from individual plaintiff lawsuits in several significant ways. The differences include:

• Number of people represented
• Recovery even if individual damages are small
• Potential outcomes and precedent

These suits are brought on behalf of a large number of people joined together as a class, rather than just on behalf of an individual plaintiff. They also allow for recovery for smaller per person damages that would otherwise be impractical to sue for due to the cost of litigation. The outcome of a class action lawsuit can include changing the behavior of the defendant and setting precedent. For example, the cases can sometimes stop the defendant and others in the industry from unfair business practices, such as false or misleading advertising.

https://www.cooper-firm.com/class-actions/

 

[RANCH]

I have no idea. Maybe interest would be applied, but I don't know. Restitution is a life long debt, so it would have to be paid at some point in time. I can't imagine they can live off of KPs salary only for the rest of their lives.

BBM

Not if your OJ Simpson.