Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #11

Status
Not open for further replies.
This, exactly.
If he says too little, that's not good enough.
If he says a lot, that's not good enough.
Poor guy can never say "just enough."

It is just strange to me that we keep going back to "what I would do." That started from why he used the Find My Phone app, and it is still happening with his statement.
I will be the first to admit that I have no bleeping idea what the actual bleep I would do, and I hope to God I will never have to find out.

JMO
BBM

Ain't that the truth?! Nobody knows what they would do, and to pretend that they do is preposterous. Even those of us who have been in a traumatic situation might not face the next one the same way.

Fight/Flight/Freeze? Is everybody so sure they would fight or flee? Even if that could cost them their life? The truth is, when that adrenaline & norepinephrine kicks in, you are doing a lot more reacting than you are thinking. You're not sitting behind a keyboard planning your next move. Your body controls more of what you do than your mind does.

One thing we can do is to take a self-defense course to try to rehearse what we can do in the event we are ever attacked or an attempt is made to abduct us. And then review the moves frequently. Be prepared. Those who are able and willing should arm themselves and take a course.
 
@Steelman, Sheriff Bosenko has a very long and impressive history with LE, in a multitude of capacities.

One can believe every word the family has stated, believe with certainty that this was no hoax, and feel absolute compassion for the victims without insisting that the Sheriff is the bad guy.

Sheriff Bosenko either has some very dangerous or very manipulative people from whom he needs to protect his community. Identifying and apprehending them, not pacifying on-line case followers, should be his top priority (and the Papini family's as well), in my opinion. Sometimes the two are indeed mutually exclusive.

I don't think Sheriff Bosenko acted like an ahole (at least, not that I saw) about an outside negotiator and anonymous donor being interjected into his investigation, though I bet he considered it a nuisance and a risk (wrongly or rightly so).

I also don't think he's acting like an ahole about Keith Papini putting details into the public domain that the Sheriff obviously would rather have kept contained.

I have no reason to believe that the Sheriff's wish to withhold certain information stems from a desire to make Sherri Papini look bad or to frustrate people on the internet.

I support the sheriff and I'm rooting for him to solve this case.
 
Bigfirmlawmom :hug:

and :welcome: to Websleuths!

Knox said:
snipped by me...
Informal Poll-After hearing the additional details today: Hoax or Real Abduction?

Real... but didn't think she would be alive! Truly glad she is!

Oh I'm scared to post this and see another 200 posts.... :scared:

LOL!

Well... tried to post this on the last thread - but no go! Whew - just another thread...

I too agree with someone here saying that there was too much publicity - I believe it was sex traffickers, and they let her go.

Prayers and good wishes to the Papinis.
 
If 'she never found out who did it,' how do you know it was a classmate that did it? Why are you saying she was in high school at the age of 21? It seems strange that she would either graduate years late or that she would have so many enemies from high school that she'd be sure it was one of them yet not be able to ID them, especially if she had graduated from high school years earlier as it seems like she would have been the class of 2000.

It also seems really strange for a "prank" - pretty elaborate and out there...I mean, did they point people to it after it was posted? Or somehow just expected people to come across this article on their own? Anyway, prank is what we have for now, so prank it is.
 
<modsnip>

LE would never condone or EVER admit it even if THEY did know. It's illegal and a huge threat.

Think about it. If ANYONE admitted paying for someone's return (whether it's a reward or ransom) there would be copycats like crazy, trying to earn quick money by abducting US citizens.

If a case this public got away with it, other criminals would be swarming...

JMO

There has been no evidence that a ransom was paid. The only evidence is to the contrary based upon Cameron Gamble's statements in this article: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article117588963.html

He also has previously stated publicly that paying a ransom is not illegal according to his attorneys. I'm not an attorney so I have no idea personally.
 
@Steelman, Sheriff Bosenko has a very long and impressive history with LE, in a multitude of capacities.

One can believe every word the family has stated, believe with certainty that this was no hoax, and feel absolute compassion for the victims without insisting that the Sheriff is the bad guy.

Sheriff Bosenko either has some very dangerous or very manipulative people from whom he needs to protect his community. Identifying and apprehending them, not pacifying on-line case followers, should be his top priority (and the Panini family's as well), in my opinion. Sometimes the two are indeed mutually exclusive.

I don't think Sheriff Bosenko acted like an ahole (at least, not that I saw) about an outside negotiator and anonymous donor being interjected into his investigation, though I bet he considered it a nuisance and a risk (wrongly or rightly so).

I also don't think he's acting like an ahole about Keith Panini putting details into the public domain that the Sheriff obviously would rather have kept contained.

I have no reason to believe that the Sheriff's wish to withhold certain information stems from a desire to make Sherri Panini look bad or to frustrate people on the internet.

I support the sheriff and I'm rooting for him to solve this case.

Sorry to nitpick, but her name is Sherri Papini, not Sherri Panini.
 
Why has no specifics been given about her captors?
If it was in fact, Sherri in that truck, she has seen the faces.
Was this a planned abduction that comes with no threat to the general public?
Was she afraid to speak ?
Was the ransom paid out and they are sticking to their word about not going to LE?

If it was random, and there are dangerous people kidnapping people, the public should be informed IMo

I really believe that it could be that she was threatened and is too scared to give a description. Or is it possible that she was drugged, and can't recall very many details?
 
RSC said:
snipped by me...
I don't know much about this case yet, but why would the driver say she has long blond hair, but husband says it was chopped off? Anyone know?

As you can see in some of her pictures - her is very, very long. They could have "chopped" off her hair to her shoulders, which would still be long to some people.
 
I was picturing something like that too, but yeah the husband said she used the bag to wave someone down after she was able to free her hand. Didn't he? How would she have gotten loose from legitimate restraints like that?

Edit, yeah, from the statement:

The ONLY thing I could think of (as I have been thinking about this alot) is that #1 - it was NOT handcuffs so no key was needed to open them - it was hose clamps which can be opened with a dime, screwdriver (which I'm sure she didn't have access to) or possibly even a finger nail. she worked at opening the hose clamps and managed to get one loose enough to get her one wrist free, took off the bag and then waved it to attract attention OR possibly #2 - she bend over frontwards with her head as far as she could (like putting her head down toward her chest) and possibly her fingers could reach the bag and she worked with her head and her restrained hands to get the bag to come off little by little until it was totally off and in her hands. #2 was my though last night when I wondered out loud if what she had in fact been waving was what was on her head and that is why she couldn't see the driver. Just my thoughts.
 
It all seems a bit personal. Cutting off her hair, branding her. Why let her go, why let her live?

They didn t do it to kill her.
Not trafficking they would not damage her face and cut her long blonde hair.
I still say it's a hate crime.
I'm very curious about her being branded.
 
I'm really beginning to think she was abducted by dumb and dumber.
Not professionals, not for sex trade, possibly for money, they just didn't have the smarts or a follow up plan. Just get rid of her and get the hell out of Dodge.
 
Sorry to nitpick, but her name is Sherri Papini, not Sherri Panini.

:facepalm: Thank you, Ariane! My brain knows that, but my fingers or my correcter have a mind of their own. I fixed my original post.
 
Perhaps a lot of the details are confusing, but it could have simply been a crime of opportunity perpetrated by, for example, some sadistic methheads. Or other depraved individuals. Maybe they tried to collect a ransom but were too stupid or high to figure it out. Or maybe they got paid and figured they wouldn't be hunted for the rest of their lives if they didn't kill her.

The most compelling detail to me, still, is the dumping at the roadside. That indicates payment or panic. Either way, it's strictly amateur. Thank God.
 
I am not sure why the current length of her hair is important.
It was very long, now it is chopped

Eye witnesses are often wrong
I expect the witness who says she saw her on the road may have added long blond hair as this is what she remembered seeing in the news
Obviously, when she was found by LE her hair was shorter
 
I agree, but I also think they wanted to change her looks so she would not be recognized by any johns. :moo:

I feel the same. The branding leads me to believe "ownership" and sex industry motivation. Without doing research on this woman, just seeing her run down the road, I do believe people could think she was 18-20.

This poor woman my heart goes out to her. Her life will forever be changed by this horrible situation. As well as her husband who will most likely feel guilty that he wasn't able to protect her.

they need prayers for healing.....
 
There has been no evidence that a ransom was paid. The only evidence is to the contrary based upon Cameron Gamble's statements in this article: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/article117588963.html

He also has previously stated publicly that paying a ransom is not illegal according to his attorneys. I'm not an attorney so I have no idea personally.

They (the people who received the ransom if one was paid) can't get it or spend it though, so even if CG promised no LE, IMO they would still go after the kidnappers whether or not any ransom was paid.

I do wonder if CG and friends didn't assist LE what could happen to them. Does the law care what kind of promises you made to kidnappers?
 
Cutting her hair could have been a way to disguise her.
I would like to know how long it is now.
Someone posted a bit ago shaved but none of the links say that.
My hair is long to most people but I consider it medium. But that's not here nor there.
I was in the hoax group but only because I didn't really know where I belonged lol.
And times I think it's someone she knew. Then I think no

I think LE knew she wasn't in Redding anymore from the first week, but why ? What led them there?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
50
Guests online
2,415
Total visitors
2,465

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,954
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top