I have googled things like this soooo many times since I started following these types of cases. If there were someone tracking this type of activity they would've been knocking at my door years ago lol.
Facts are the facts.
No evidence that she didn't have shoes, the sister said as much. All we know is that the boots were on the roof. She might have had shoes or she might not have.
If facts are facts please get them right. L.E. stated the friend Adrienne called SAID "Adrienne said she shot him in face" --- So fact would be correct if stated correct. Point is friend could have misheard.Or made it up. If so no blood.
The way I look at it, she wouldn't have been wearing boots at 2:45 AM. Its a rustic cabin, so she could possibly have been wearing sneakers or comfortable footwear. I think she bay have grabbed the boots with the idea of running in to a marshy area, but for one reason or another didn't use them. Possibly she was caught, or she just felt she didn't have time to change them.
Whoa, there, Birmingplumb, you're sounding a bit aggressive there. Now, to get to your question of 'why?', I'm not sure what you're asking, specifically.
Certainly possible... there are some mighty sick people in this world.
The problem is that these days the police will out and out lie to the public. I recall in the Jayme Closs case that the perp never went more that three feet inside the house. As it turns out, he went much further. What I learned from that group is that much of what I heard on social media was bang on, what I learned here was pretty much nothing.
True dat. I just can't get past the lack of response from Lundy. Of course logically I know that LE likely asked some pretty tough questions, which prompted him to get an attorney. More than likely that attorney told him to keep his mouth shut. Now if it were my wife, nothing would have stopped me from looking for her, but I also understand that many people are in relationships of convenience, with no love, just various benefits for each. He simply might not care.
Understood. Problem is making too many assumptions. Taking all of the facts together, at this time, there's no indication that anyone else was at the house.
If there were indeed two men there, you have to ask what they were there for. Nothing of value to steal, and she's not exactly rolling in money. Like with Jayme Closs, there was only one thing missing, Adrienne. Why do you take a woman? I have seen very few, if any, cases that the motive wasn't sexually related. Unfortunately the Closs case told these sickos one thing, it is possible to keep a sex slave for a very extended period of time, and if her captor had invested in a pair of handcuffs, Jayme would still probably be there today.
That is true, but we have not heard exactly was said to the friend or what she may have heard. What evidence would the intruders leave outside the cabin? If they showed up and scared her out the window, she could have easily been grabbed and taken. Yes, no shots were fired besides Ade's, but if she is what you came for, why would you return fire? Picture her coming on the roof, sitting down to put on her boots, when someone points a shotgun and tells her to freeze. The first thing he would say would be "throw your gun on the ground". At that point she is as good as gone. It would be unlikely that there would be any evidence to be found in that scenario.
