Found Deceased CA - Kiely Rodni missing from Party Near Prosser Family Campground in Truckee #9

Status
Not open for further replies.
um, thats what I meant, they do have the names of whomever that particular service call was and LE has undoubtedly required them to give it up. So Nick RA knows, LE knows, Nick RAs company knows, who they are. The million dollar question is, does awp% I am guessing that they do not have any idea unless Nick blabbed. But they do know its not Kiely, and its not Jagger.
ummm I agree with the bolded part you stated because that was I was stataing. However, we don't know who those people were. I am assuming its Kiely, because Nick the RA would have made sure it wasn't a stolen car (they do that where I live so I assume its standard practice in tha industry.)
 
I guess to nothing it didn't happen. To his service call and what he observed there. Otherwise what else is there.
He probably saw Kiely's picture, remembered an incident earlier in the week he had with two teenagers, and the story evolved from that. It doesn't mean he didn't see what he saw. I just wish he hadn't included Jagger in his story. These kids first had the shock of hearing of Kiely's death, and now they have to deal with bullying on line.
 
He probably saw Kiely's picture, remembered an incident earlier in the week he had with two teenagers, and the story evolved from that. It doesn't mean he didn't see what he saw. I just wish he hadn't included Jagger in his story. These kids first had the shock of hearing of Kiely's death, and now they have to deal with bullying on line.

RA Nick did not use Jagger's name. He said 'a guy'. At about the 4:20 mark in the vid, he says, 'There was a guy there...' RA Nick never mentions a name for the guy. eta: RA Nick refers to him consistently in the vid as the 'guy.'
 
Last edited:
So, if MOD is Accident and COD is drowning that would mean Keily drove herself into the water. IMOO I believe Tox report will show alcohol or drugs in her blood therefor it would be Homicidal Drowning, and those responsible for supplying her can be charged
Not to mention she was a new driver, a minor, therefore cannot drive after dark.
Seems as if a number of people in that community will have to be held accountable.
IMOO the community of Truckee already know what happened. Maybe why AWP is not treated like hero's rather like interlopers changing the "drunk girl drives into water, just an accident", narrative.
Yes, LE has said they interviewed about 400 people.They may have gathered important information from those interviews. If alcohol was purchased at any of the stores in the area I think LE may charge them and any adult who supplied alcohol or drugs to underage teenagers.
 
RA Nick did not use Jagger's name. He said 'a guy'. At about the 4:20 mark in the vid, he says, 'There was a guy there...' RA Nick never mentions a name for the guy. eta: RA Nick refers to him consistently in the vid as the 'guy.'
When I listened to the interview he described someone wearing a hat with hair sticking out all over, which is exactly the way Jagger looked in his interview. To me it seemed he was strongly implying it was Jagger.
If not, he must have known what people were posting on SM.
 
Why would Roadside Nick know what people were implying on social media?

I'm a regular poster here, and I did not understand how crazy people were on some social media formats until it was pointed out here, and until I specifically went looking on my own, outside of the thread, for anything related to the party--i.e. wading through the crap I mentioned previously.

Yes, Jagger frequently wears a SF Giants hat from what we have seen, BUT those even come in different styles color combinations. Yes, Jagger has longish brown hair. He looks like he's a little taller than Kiely based on approved MSM images of the two together, but officially I have no idea how tall he is? I did NOT notice acne or freckles on Jagger's face.

Could Roadside Nick have been describing Jagger? Yes, of course. But he could have been describing anyone else too. He never said "I think it was Jagger" or "Looked like they were romantic" or anything leading. He just described what he saw when he went on the call.

Here is the bottomline: We do not know what happened yet.AWP, Roadside Nick, Sami's interviews, tips coming in, any of it? Just part of the big picture. In the end, maybe none of it will end up relevant. Maybe something happened , or someone is somehow involved that we're all completely unaware of.
 
When I listened to the interview he described someone wearing a hat with hair sticking out all over, which is exactly the way Jagger looked in his interview. To me it seemed he was strongly implying it was Jagger.
If not, he must have known what people were posting on SM.

Many young men wear their hats and hair like that.
 
I do include accident in the anything may have happened/we do not know what happened yet as well. It was too late to edit post above to make that clear.

I take Roadside Nick as a possible witness. That's all. No one should jump to the conclusion he saw Jagger, or is implicating Jagger in any way. He saw a young guy in a forward facing black SF cap, in a white bro tank, a bit shorter than himself, with long-ish brown hair, and either acne or freckles.

He also saw a young woman, in a light grey sweatshirt, who seemed nervous around the young man, who moved away from the young man at times, and who was asking weird questions about how to fasten a seatbelt. For example, how to attach the seat belt to her belt.

Less clear to me if it was Kiely's car. i.e. AWP never pointedly asked for the ID of the plate number, or make, model and year of the vehicle.

I find it unusual LE does not simply say something like "Yes, we know about Roadside Nick, and we're reviewing all tips."

I do NOT know what it might mean to be "No comment" about pretty much everything in a case. It's interesting....but I would not interpret it to mean LE thinks AWP and Roadside Nick are not worthy of comment OR to mean the info from Roadside Nick is the stuff that solves everything.

The more I think about this, and how silent LE is, I think we have next to no information as observers.
 
I was reading about homicidal drowning cases, because I’m intrigued now.


This news article from 2014 describes an accident which led to arrests of the adults who provided alcohol to underage kids. I wonder if we’ll see anything like this in KR’s case. I think someone mentioned it before, but you can trace beer and alcoholic beverages by codes.
They were charged with providing alcohol to minors. Class 1 misdemeanors. Perhaps someone can be charged with a more serious crime when they provide alcohol to minors but I am not sure. Are drug dealers ever charged with manslaughter or homicide if one of their customers ODs?
 
They were charged with providing alcohol to minors. Class 1 misdemeanors. Perhaps someone can be charged with a more serious crime when they provide alcohol to minors but I am not sure. Are drug dealers ever charged with manslaughter or homicide if one of their customers ODs?

Here’s just one example-right in Placer county:

 
RA Nick did not use Jagger's name. He said 'a guy'. At about the 4:20 mark in the vid, he says, 'There was a guy there...' RA Nick never mentions a name for the guy. eta: RA Nick refers to him consistently in the vid as the 'guy.'
I could say well the man was stocky, had a red hat, a long white beard, a red suit. He was carrying a bagful of toys and said ho ho ho. who would we assume I was talking about%
 
Here’s just one example-right in Placer county:

you are both right. the sentences vary and sometimes you are left wondering, why did they get off without murder charges. maybe a lawyer on here could exlain it better.


darring21 said:
They were charged with providing alcohol to minors. Class 1 misdemeanors. Perhaps someone can be charged with a more serious crime when they provide alcohol to minors but I am not sure. Are drug dealers ever charged with manslaughter or homicide if one of their customers ODs?
 
From what I'm finding, they weren't told NOT search there, rather, that it was searched extensively by LE so they didn't need to. Good thing AWP didn't pay that any mind, eh? ;)

On Sunday, August 21, the duo decided to search Prosser Lake, despite the fact that the Sheriff’s Office said it had already searched the lake with sonar “extensively.”


And this one. But again, the wording isn't "Don't search there".

Josh Cantu, a spokesman for the diving group Adventures With Purpose, told the New York Post about the discovery on Sunday and said: “Police told us they did a rigorous search of this body of water. They gave us a grid map and made us confident we didn’t need to search here.

But with all that... the NYP isn't the most factual paper IMHO.


From what I'm finding, they weren't told NOT search there, rather, that it was searched extensively by LE so they didn't need to. Good thing AWP didn't pay that any mind, eh? ;)

On Sunday, August 21, the duo decided to search Prosser Lake, despite the fact that the Sheriff’s Office said it had already searched the lake with sonar “extensively.”


And this one. But again, the wording isn't "Don't search there".

Josh Cantu, a spokesman for the diving group Adventures With Purpose, told the New York Post about the discovery on Sunday and said: “Police told us they did a rigorous search of this body of water. They gave us a grid map and made us confident we didn’t need to search here.

But with all that... the NYP isn't the most factual paper IMHO.

Thank you Gemmie for quoting from the NYP . You were very kind to do the research. Apologies to you for not giving a reference .
 
you are both right. the sentences vary and sometimes you are left wondering, why did they get off without murder charges. maybe a lawyer on here could exlain it better.


darring21 said:
They were charged with providing alcohol to minors. Class 1 misdemeanors. Perhaps someone can be charged with a more serious crime when they provide alcohol to minors but I am not sure. Are drug dealers ever charged with manslaughter or homicide if one of their customers ODs?
In the case of the drug dealing, it looks like they were selling pills and the buyers did not know they were laced with fenanyl.
 
On here 1O years and have never seen a case where LE is forthcoming. They will be interactive when they need something from the public, some are charismatic and so we might feel a connection, but they do not feel it. They only give to get back, it is definitely a one sided relationship. They will lead you on for info, but when they get it, they will not share it or even say where they got it. And really, why should they% The perp is always out there with the websleuths...maybe even on WS. chilling isnt it% Not talking about KR specifically. But we should not be let down when LE clams up.

Nick is a better underwater salvager than LE
LE is better criminal investigators than awp
 
Was not saying perps are among us here and posting. I meant, LE is highly aware that the perp is out here among the public, is probably following their own crime on social media and no way is LE going to start blabbing info online. Many of the cases on here include ones where the killers knowledge of SM was stupefying and downright scary.

LE gives us the exact tidbit they want us to have and that is it. In this case, as everyone has been saying on here, right now, its IMO about who enabled, or maybe even a rufie. Now you have your homicidal drowning, causing someone to drown specifically because someone gave them something intoxifying around water.

The only thing about rufie though, is I still IMO think she drove into the water. Rufies take effect pretty quickly you do not roll into them they hit you like a sledgehammer in about 1O minutes, with alcohol. I know because I have been rufied.
 
RA Nick purportedly made a service call to Boca and later upon hearing about Kiely's disappearance, claims he contacted LE and then approached AWP regarding his claims. He very well may believe he had pertinent information. Where it went from there would be between LE and the actual company he contracted with as they are the record keepers. There's no way to confirm or refute his claims with any certainty at this time. LE may or may not address the situation when they disclose findings. AWP would have no way of getting Nick's claim because they are not LE and the company wouldn't disclose information to them, or at least they shouldn't.

I never found Jagger even remotely suspicious. He's just a kid who acts like a kid. In fact, as far as kids go, he seems like a pretty nice one judging by his comments, concern for Kiely, friendship with Kiely post break-up or whatever occurred, and his SM which shows his true love to be fishing. It doesn't get much more wholesome than that, especially in today's world. Not sure why people have any lingering doubts about him. I'm definitely bothered by any descriptions of possibly suspicious individuals matching him. That could have been a coincidence but mighty weird.

I continue to believe this was a tragic accident. It's possible LE is looking into who provided booze etc, but that might be difficult to pinpoint if several people brought booze. Unless an adult personally pulled Kiely aside and handed her booze I don't know if anybody could be held responsible. There may be several people who get charged with contributing to the delinquency along other relevant charges but I don't see it going beyond that. I could be wrong. Waiting patiently for findings. Hoping her loved ones are able to eat, sleep and carry on because this was a enormous loss that could take the life out a parent.

I'm with you for most of this.

Where I break is the possibility for some of the adult partygoers to possibly see charges. I think it could either way, and I agree with others who have mentioned local culture factors in. The rural area where I grew up has had so many deaths related to 16 year-olds (and younger) driving under the influence, and I cannot recall anyone actually being charged. There was often anger and speculation locally and on social media over who supplied the substances, (older friends, clerks in local stores) but basically, no one ever went forward with civil or criminal charges.

The only thing I have ever seen has been stings by law enforcement which have followed an uptick in tragedies. Then what happened was LE seeing which local stores would sell to minors, and follow up in the media, with fines. I think we might see something similar if it can be proven a store sold directly to Kiely.
 
Respectfully MsBetsy, I'll add some specificity, that in their presser when they announced that interview count, LE said 400 juveniles had been interviewed. IIRC, we don't yet know how many adults (18 and over) LE has interviewed.

Interesting point.

It's really easy to gloss over the distinction between "kids" and 18+, i.e. a young adult.

Most of us are far removed from 18, 19, etc. I'm assuming, so we use the two interchangeably, but I think LE would be careful not to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
195
Guests online
3,206
Total visitors
3,401

Forum statistics

Threads
592,163
Messages
17,964,405
Members
228,706
Latest member
mhenderson
Back
Top