Found Deceased WY - Gabby Petito, Grand Teton National Park #88

[RANCH]

Gabby Petito's dad joins 'America's Most Wanted' season finale as revived show celebrates major capture

Gabby Petito's father, an advocate for domestic violence victims and missing persons, joins John and Callahan Walsh Monday evening for the season finale of "America's Most Wanted."

news.yahoo.com

"Joe has been doing a great job of healing – and also fighting back," he said. "The Gabby Petito Foundation, missing people groups, as I watched my parents make sure that Adam didn't die in vain, Joe's doing the same with Gabby."

 

[Cool Cats]

Good to know. But I guess it depends on how a "private interest" is defined. It's not entirely clear to me this lawsuit was entirely "private" in that sense. But leaving this one aside, would the case against the City of Moab be a private interest too? I'm pretty sure it's been stated part of the purpose of that lawsuit is to ensure future mistakes aren't made when assessing DV cases.
MOO

Yes the civil lawsuits are "private interest" just as it would be "private interest" if one of them were arrested and needed a defense attorney - it has nothing to do with the foundation.

The foundation can hire their own attorney and pay them accordingly but the attorney would only be protecting the interests of the foundation, such as a tax attorney or other specialty attorney experienced with the "red tape" of running a foundation.

2 Cents

 

[al66pine]

Possibilities Are Not Facts.

....
But to know their son killed her, they couldn't answer the phone calls. The attorney specifically told Chris "gone" could mean dead and Roberta specifically admitted "gone" crossed her mind as Gabby being dead....

snipped for focus @Cool Cats
Maybe BL did EXPLICITLY tell CL, RL, & Bertolino that GP was dead and that he killed her. IDK. Short of that, how would CL & RL KNOW as a fact that GP was dead? And also know as a fact that their son killed her?

Various members have posted this thought. The fact that in their depo's given under oath CL, RL, & Bertolino all said they they considered the POSSIBILITY that GP was dead, does not establish that any of the three KNEW as a FACT that she was dead. Or of BL's guilt.
Not w (now publicly-known, thru their depo's) info RL, CL, & Bertolini had at the time, during those three to four wks,* that is, until remains were located & confirmed to be GP's.
imo
________________
* "Killing of Petito: Uncertain day in late August 2021
(3–4 weeks prior to discovery of remains on September 19)"

Killing of Gabby Petito - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MyBelle]

Good to know. But I guess it depends on how a "private interest" is defined. It's not entirely clear to me this lawsuit was entirely "private" in that sense. But leaving this one aside, would the case against the City of Moab be a private interest too? I'm pretty sure it's been stated part of the purpose of that lawsuit is to ensure future mistakes aren't made when assessing DV cases.
MOO

I'm looking forward to the Moab case to see how it unfolds. It can't be considered a private interest if the defendant is an employee paid by taxpayers, can it?

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

Possibilities Are Not Facts.

snipped for focus @Cool Cats
Maybe BL did EXPLICITLY tell CL, RL, & Bertolino that GP was dead and that he killed her. IDK. Short of that, how would CL & RL KNOW as a fact that GP was dead? And also know as a fact that their son killed her?

Various members have posted this thought. The fact that in their depo's given under oath CL, RL, & Bertolino all said they they considered the POSSIBILITY that GP was dead, does not establish that any of the three KNEW as a FACT that she was dead. Or of BL's guilt.
Not w (now publicly-known, thru their depo's) info RL, CL, & Bertolini had at the time, during those three to four wks,* that is, until remains were located & confirmed to be GP's.
imo
________________
* "Killing of Petito: Uncertain day in late August 2021
(3–4 weeks prior to discovery of remains on September 19)"

Killing of Gabby Petito - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I never said the Laundrie's knew their son killed Gabby. Both the attorney and Roberta knew that "gone" could mean that Brian killed her. Knowing he may have killed her - in case he actually did - was a real good reason for them to avoid the parents of the girl their son may have killed.

2 Cents

 

[Sundog]

If only their attorney hadn't put out that statement they could have simply had the case dismissed and gotten away with it.

2 Cents

<SBM>

"Gotten away" with what?

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1762308120322179398

 

[Cool Cats]

<SBM>

"Gotten away" with what?

Whatever they had to do to end the lawsuit. They were forced to take legal accountability.
Even if it was just an apology, accountability is accountability.

2 Cents

 

[Sundog]

Yes the civil lawsuits are "private interest" just as it would be "private interest" if one of them were arrested and needed a defense attorney - it has nothing to do with the foundation.

The foundation can hire their own attorney and pay them accordingly but the attorney would only be protecting the interests of the foundation, such as a tax attorney or other specialty attorney experienced with the "red tape" of running a foundation.

2 Cents

For some, it could have the appearance of a conflict of interests, ethically-speaking, if a member of the board of a foundation is also an attorney prosecuting a civil lawsuit. The financial gain from the lawsuit, if successful, could be donated to the foundation.

Many of us ("we") might have a problem with that, ethically-speaking. Even if there are no legal issues.

ETA Thinking of Moab lawsuit here.

 

[RANCH]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1762308120322179398

Thanks for bringing this to the thread.

I think it's great that Joe Petitio is moving on from the Laundrie lawsuit and going in a more positive and productive direction by being an advocate for the missing. JMO.

 

[RANCH]

For some, it could have the appearance of a conflict of interests, ethically-speaking, if a member of the board of a foundation is also an attorney prosecuting a civil lawsuit. The financial gain from the lawsuit, if successful, could be donated to the foundation.

Many of us ("we") might have a problem with that, ethically-speaking. Even if there are no legal issues.

ETA Thinking of Moab lawsuit here.

The Moab lawsuit. I almost forgot about it.

Probably time for me to do a refresher on the details.

 

[MyBelle]

For some, it could have the appearance of a conflict of interests, ethically-speaking, if a member of the board of a foundation is also an attorney prosecuting a civil lawsuit. The financial gain from the lawsuit, if successful, could be donated to the foundation.

Many of us ("we") might have a problem with that, ethically-speaking. Even if there are no legal issues.

ETA Thinking of Moab lawsuit here.

BBM. Not only unethical, isn't that a way to evade paying taxes?

JMO

 

[Cool Cats]

For some, it could have the appearance of a conflict of interests, ethically-speaking, if a member of the board of a foundation is also an attorney prosecuting a civil lawsuit. The financial gain from the lawsuit, if successful, could be donated to the foundation.

Many of us ("we") might have a problem with that, ethically-speaking. Even if there are no legal issues.

ETA Thinking of Moab lawsuit here.

Someone posted that one of the Petito's lawyers was on the foundation board so they would have represented them in their former civil lawsuit but also been on the board.

Many attorneys sit on foundation boards non-profit and for-profit and of course they are still allowed to do their job and keep their income. They can donate and get a tax deduction if they so desire.

2 Cents

 

[al66pine]

I never said the Laundrie's knew their son killed Gabby....
2 Cents

@Cool Cats
A snip from the post I responded to earlier:
"But to know their son killed her, they couldn't answer the phone calls."

I understood ^that^ to mean you were saying --- BL's parents KNEW he killed her.
Maybe I misunderstood? Ready to move on past this point.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Someone posted that one of the Petito's lawyers was on the foundation board so they would have represented them in their former civil lawsuit but also been on the board.

Many attorneys sit on foundation boards non-profit and for-profit and of course they are still allowed to do their job and keep their income. They can donate and get a tax deduction if they so desire.

2 Cents

Stafford is on the board but he's not an attorney on the lawsuit.

 

[Cool Cats]

@Cool Cats
A snip from the post I responded to earlier:
"But to know their son killed her, they couldn't answer the phone calls."

I understood ^that^ to mean you were saying --- BL's parents KNEW he killed her.
Maybe I misunderstood? Ready to move on past this point.

But to know their son killed her, they couldn't answer the phone calls. The attorney specifically told Chris "gone" could mean dead and Roberta specifically admitted "gone" crossed her mind as Gabby being dead.

The post was about ..
They knew she could very possibly be dead so it makes sense they ignored Nicole.

I personally believe Brian told them what he said in his letter because they never helped with searching in any way.

 

[MyBelle]

Stafford is on the board but he's not an attorney on the lawsuit.

Right. I think that is why Bertolino used his depo to call him out about the death threats.

JMO

 

[RANCH]

Yup.

If they thought she was alive they would have no reason not to take the mom's phone calls. No reason to not encourage a search, etc...

But to know their son killed her, they couldn't answer the phone calls. The attorney specifically told Chris "gone" could mean dead and Roberta specifically admitted "gone" crossed her mind as Gabby being dead.

Makes sense to avoid the parents of the daughter their son killed.

If only their attorney hadn't put out that statement they could have simply had the case dismissed and gotten away with it.

2 Cents

Seems like you are saying that since the Laundries didn't take Gabby's moms calls that means they knew she was dead and you bolstered that train of thought by adding it makes sense for them to avoid her parents because their son killed her.

Not contacting Gabby's parent isn't solid evidence that the Laundries knew Gabby was dead in my opinion.

If you combine their lawyers advice to not speak to them along with the understandable uncertainty of the facts it's my opinion that the Laundries acted within reason.

JMO.

 

[al66pine]

MEDIATOR'S REPORT re civil case
Parents of GP, Parents v BL, & Bertolino.
Was filed in ct. today.

Well, ^that^ one is done & dusted.
Any news on case against Moab?

_____________________________________
"MEDIATOR’S REPORT
"The undersigned Mediator hereby reports to the Court the disposition of the mediation of the above
captioned action. The mediation was held on February 21, 2024, and all required persons were in
attendance. The results of the Mediation Conference are as follows.
"A settlement agreement was signed."
Bears Feb 26 date w elec. siggie of mediator. File date = same

Not sure if this will work for everyone, but the doc can be found per instructions below.
https://secure.sarasotaclerk.com/ViewPDF.aspx?id=4DC4DAA3-B733-4ACA-8AA3-99E7F0754B1B

@Smelly Squirrel TYVM for posting this info previously.
"You can get any of the filed documents at the court site Sarasota Clerk
Case number is 2022 CA 1128 SC"

 

[Cool Cats]

Seems like you are saying that since the Laundries didn't take Gabby's moms calls that means they knew she was dead and you bolstered that train of thought by adding it makes sense for them to avoid her parents because their son killed her.

Not contacting Gabby's parent isn't solid evidence that the Laundries knew Gabby was dead in my opinion.

If you combine their lawyers advice to not speak to them along with the understandable uncertainty of the facts it's my opinion that the Laundries acted within reason.

JMO.

What the Laundrie's knew shows in their depositions. They knew their son may have killed a woman and this could be why they completely cut off the woman's mom and dad.

If a person's son kills or may have killed someone's daughter it would be best not to talk to the daughter's family and best not to put out statements in the media.

I believe the killer's attorney did not want the killer and his parents to talk to the Petitos specifically because the attorney knew Brian may have murdered their daughter.

No one can say that the Laundries did not think their son may have killed someone. So they clammed up.

2 Cents