Found Deceased CA - Kiely Rodni, 16, missing from a large party @ Prosser Family Campground, car not found, Truckee, 6 Aug 2022

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyhow, again in my opinion... a driver would have to be seriously impaired and driving really fast to put their car in deep water. But I guess I would not be surprise....
I agree multiple mistakes would have to be made to drive into the water via the boat ramp, but tragically it happens at boat ramps every year, and often in daylight. When you factor in darkness, intoxication, speed, a new driver, and possibility other distractions, such as trying to get a signal on one's phone, the odds go up. Hoping she is still found alive elsewhere, but under water remains my best guess.
 
Crazy enough...I dropped my iphone in the lake in the winter one year when I worked at a marina. Took me an hour to work up the nerve to jump in the freezing water to retrieve it. When I got back on land the phone was still on and receiving messages. It worked for the next couple weeks until the home button finally gave up. No idea what phone she has but its possible that it stayed on for a while after being submerged. JMO.
I did have this thought too- it would seem a little strange that the phone would immediately go out of service when it went underwater. I would think it would still send out signals for at least 30 mins, but that is an estimate based on nothing but my own guess.
 
Investigators have just confirmed at the presser that this is a missing person investigation, and there is no evidence this was an abduction.
To be fair though, the sheriff’s office itself is who initially called this an abduction investigation yesterday. That designation didn’t come from friends or family.

Edited- looking back through MSM, seems abduction wording came from the sheriff’s office Sunday evening, not Monday.
 
I did have this thought too- it would seem a little strange that the phone would immediately go out of service when it went underwater. I would think it would still send out signals for at least 30 mins, but that is an estimate based on nothing but my own guess.
That's a good point. At least with Verizon, I have a reliable signal at the Prosser boat ramp but not where the campsite is. We don't know what carrier she had. AT&T and T-Mobile do not work as well by the boat ramp, in my experience.
 
S said that she and K had gone back to K's car to charge their phones. Given the short time K was at the party before she went missing it is unlikely it would have been a full charge - more likely a short charge to allow her to keep in contact with Mum. IMO the phone stopped working as the battery went flat.

The call to S after K had apparently just seen her could IMO indicate someone was with her and she felt uncomfortable so she phoned S to see where she was hoping she was still at the party.

IMO K is in her car in the water. Either she accidentally drove into the water as she had been drinking; or perhaps she was in a hurry to leave as she was uncomfortable and she was speeding and got disorientated.

I think they will find her soon.
 
I did have this thought too- it would seem a little strange that the phone would immediately go out of service when it went underwater. I would think it would still send out signals for at least 30 mins, but that is an estimate based on nothing but my own guess.
Agreed, especially if it was a newer model iPhone. But her friend talked about both of them charging their phones in Kiely's car, which means her phone must have been low on battery to begin with.

So her phone could have been low enough that it already had low battery capacity, or it was a model that was susceptible to water intrusion.
 
To be fair though, the sheriff’s office itself is who initially called this an abduction investigation yesterday. That designation didn’t come from friends or family.
Yes, but they explained they were calling it that because her car was missing, which strikes me as incredibly bizarre.

So law enforcement described it that way, and people close to her described it that way.

I assumed they must have some other basis for that designation, as a drunk teenager with a missing car near water, absolutely isn't a scenario that lends itself to a likely abduction.

Turns out there is in fact no evidence to that effect.
 
Maybe she was about to head home, decided to call her friend S to see if she needed a ride, and was distracted by the call as she tried to pull out of the campground. Maybe also getting ready to or starting to text her mom that she was en route... and this is bad case of distracted driving with her ending up down the boat ramp.
 
Yes, but they explained they were calling it that because her car was missing, which strikes me as incredibly bizarre.

So law enforcement described it that way, and people close to her described it that way.

I assumed they must have some other basis for that designation, as a drunk teenager with a missing car near water, absolutely isn't a scenario that lends itself to a likely abduction.

Turns out there is in fact no evidence to that effect.
Oh, I definitely agree. I was moreso pointing out that the abduction line didn’t come from her friends.
 
At this point I'm not even buying that Kiely was intoxicated. She texted her mom at 11:30 pm, an exchange her mom reports as perfectly normal. I know drunk texting when I see it and I'm sure Kiely's mom would have as well. It's entirely possible that Kiely's falling out with Sami and Megs had nothing to do with alcohol or intoxication.

Why does one abruptly shut off their phone? It's usually because one is receiving upsetting calls or texts and doesn't want to deal with it anymore. Kiely shut off her phone shortly after midnight, according to LE. Sami alleges Kiely called her at 12:36 am, so Kiely must have turned off her phone within minutes of that call. Why?

I don't take "witness" statements as gospel. The statements may be true, they may not be true. I'm not convinced these girls are giving an accurate account of what happened. IMO
Kiely may not have been the person who shut down her phone...
Another scenario -- Someone may have seen her and realized she was inebriated (at least her friend says she was), and volunteered to drive her home and took her somewhere else...
 
Okay, I know I am just hyper focusing on details that may not matter. But the fact that SS has changed her story over and over bothers me. In this interview she says she the last person to have talked to her.

How does she know she didn't talk to a dozen other people after that?

Obviously LE is letting her take an active roll so maybe her overall testimony to them has stayed the same. I just hate when story details change from conversation to conversation.

 
Yes, but they explained they were calling it that because her car was missing, which strikes me as incredibly bizarre.

So law enforcement described it that way, and people close to her described it that way.
*snipped*

It is a good idea to treat it as an abduction if the vehicle is missing for 3 days now. This is a minor she doesn't own the vehicle. The vehicle can be reported stolen. When my ex ran away the first thing we ditched was her vehicle and yes LE eventually found out. We ditched it in front of Walmart because it wasn't hers, she then left a message for her parents to find it. So they do in fact from my experience at least look at it from a vehicle angle as far as behavior is concerned. If it's a runaway she's got a very big bullseye on her with that vehicle. I also noticed the miles it didn't look like it was gonna break down anytime soon and was a vehicle for that terrain. I believe it's 4WD with 66k or less miles on it. Nice vehicle.
 
Samantha said that she arrived at the bonfire party around 9pm on Friday and Kiely got there about an hour later.

Samantha said that around 11pm, they went to Kiely’s car to charge their phones and arranged for Kiely to give her a ride home.

However, she changed her mind later when she saw that Kiely was clearly intoxicated, Samantha said.

“Right now we believe that it is an abduction case ... she was in no state to drive and she wouldn’t have made it far or would have crashed,” Samantha said.
 
*snipped*

It is a good idea to treat it as an abduction if the vehicle is missing for 3 days now. This is a minor she doesn't own the vehicle. The vehicle can be reported stolen. When my ex ran away the first thing we ditched was her vehicle and yes LE eventually found out. We ditched it in front of Walmart because it wasn't hers, she then left a message for her parents to find it. So they do in fact from my experience at least look at it from a vehicle angle as far as behavior is concerned. If it's a runaway she's got a very big bullseye on her with that vehicle. I also noticed the miles it didn't look like it was gonna break down anytime soon and was a vehicle for that terrain. I believe it's 4WD with 66k or less miles on it. Nice vehicle.
I have zero issue with law enforcement treating this as an abduction, my point is that there is almost no chance that this is in fact an abduction.
 
This makes sense to me too bc why did SS see KR at 12:30am but then KR called SS at 12:36am about KR giving SS a ride? That piece hasn’t made since to me since that statement came out.
I'm sure SS had been drinking too, so how she can remember all these times with such minute-by-minute accuracy is beyond me.

Yes, SS's cellphone will have the call times in/out, but certainly not the times she saw Kiely or spoke to her.

SS should've been enjoying the party and chilling out, but it sounds like she spent most of the party looking at her watch.

MOO.
 
Samantha said that she arrived at the bonfire party around 9pm on Friday and Kiely got there about an hour later.

Samantha said that around 11pm, they went to Kiely’s car to charge their phones and arranged for Kiely to give her a ride home.

However, she changed her mind later when she saw that Kiely was clearly intoxicated, Samantha said.

“Right now we believe that it is an abduction case ... she was in no state to drive and she wouldn’t have made it far or would have crashed,” Samantha said.
This is the 1st I heard that it was a bonfire party. I thought that no fires are allowed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
3,275
Total visitors
3,460

Forum statistics

Threads
592,301
Messages
17,967,007
Members
228,737
Latest member
clintbentwood
Back
Top