Possible Victim: Shannan Gilbert #2

PreciousDust

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
537
Reaction score
316
Please refer to John Ray’s synopsis.....

One example ... is when Erin Moriarty of 48 hours asked Peter Hackett about the phone call to Mari Gilbert

Links, or you haven't made the argument. In the case of Ray's speech, I wouldn't know which of Ray's claims you took seriously without you mentioning those yourself. With Erin Moriarty, I need to see/hear the question to know what Hackett's answer means.
 

WINDSOR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
3,612
Pak, on page 228: "I think Alex called Mari and put Hackett on the phone."
Then, by the way, Ray asks Pak if Hackett mentioned a home for wayward girls, and Pak says "Never" (which isn't good enough for Ray).
So, in that scenario, people are just handing phones to Hackett with Mari already on the line.

Does anyone refute Hackett's explanation of how he got Mari's number? Where do those people suggest that Hackett did get the number?

Hackett likely got Mari's number from Shannan when he was treating her. He as most medical professionals would asked for a 'next of kin? contact info. Hackett either got that info from Shannan, or if she was 'out of it' from Pak or from her phone.

BTW, you say Alex Dias called Shannan's mother Mari, (yes the same AD who broke Shannan's jaw so badly she needed surgery) and then handed the phone to a total stranger Hackett.

Mari never mentions the AD aspect of the call, yet makes up a part about homeward girls. Hackett never says that Alex Dias made the call and handed Hackett the phone.

Does that scenario really make sense to you? Think about it for a minute, AD calls a missing woman's mother, and hands the phone to a total stranger he has met on the street. Who and why would someone do that?
 

ACG2x

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Messages
459
Reaction score
5,384
I've never doubted that Hackett spoke with Mari. The only missing connection to me is why he did.

Pak's explanation kind of makes sense and later Hackett realizes that with Shanann likely dead, he could be in some serious trouble and/or issues with his medical license if he is involved in this hence why - per Pak - Hackett tells him when asked if he remembers talking to Mari to "talk to my lawyer".

Hackett is either somehow involved here or - which is what I have believed as the most likely scenario - he heard about her being missing and liked to insert himself into things so he offered to call her. Like his stories about how he became a doctor and war stories from Vietnam, which are also mentioned on the transcript, he greatly embellishes things and convinces Mari that he was in contact with Shanann. Then once he realizes how big this thing is, thinks uh oh I better quiet up to not hurt my career, community standing, etc.

I definitely keep my mind open about Hackett physically encountering Shanann that night though. It honestly wouldn't surprise me. Hackett does seem like an innocent enough guy meaning even if he did encounter Shanann with Pak, I don't think that he would've willingly hurt her and if he did give her a sedative it was in the vein of actually trying to assist. Really, the only one in this whole story I feel had nefarious intentions - whether to start with or after Shanann started having her breakdown on the 911 call - is Pak.
 

JJBONES

Active Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
72
Reaction score
103
Pak, on page 228: "I think Alex called Mari and put Hackett on the phone."
Then, by the way, Ray asks Pak if Hackett mentioned a home for wayward girls, and Pak says "Never" (which isn't good enough for Ray).
So, in that scenario, people are just handing phones to Hackett with Mari already on the line.

Does anyone refute Hackett's explanation of how he got Mari's number? Where do those people suggest that Hackett did get the number?
The call to Mari Gilbert was made from Peter Hackett's wife's cell phone. After he lied about contacting Mari, the cell phone records proved otherwise. Peter Hackett inserted himself into this situation and created the suspicion that has fallen on him and rightly so. In my opinion, there is no defense of his actions and lies. If he is innocent of any wrongdoing towards Shannan, then why would he get in the middle of it? Being a liar does not equal being a murderer, but his lies are what has created the suspicion and scrutiny that he has received. His statements are well documented. There is no need to try to defend him at this point.
 

WINDSOR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
3,612
Well it looks like we are in the summer doldrums of this case. As mentioned before, it is going to take political leadership to move this case forward, and contrary to my expectations after the last election, that does not seem to be happening.

Too bad.
 

White_Rabbit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
351
Reaction score
580
Well it looks like we are in the summer doldrums of this case. As mentioned before, it is going to take political leadership to move this case forward, and contrary to my expectations after the last election, that does not seem to be happening.

Too bad.
After years of research and discussion of this case I’m convinced that Peter Hackett administered some type of barbiturate to Shannon, Michael Pak dumped an unresponsive Shannan into the marsh and the investigation was hindered due to apathy and a combination of other nefarious reasons.
 

LISleuth

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
122
Reaction score
12
Shannan being given a sedative is a he said/she said between Mari Gilbert and Charles Hackett. Mari says he said it, Hackett denies saying it or doing it. There is zero evidence that it happened, it's speculation when anyone opines about it, and my opinion is that it's extremely unlikely and did not occur.

Before people ask questions about how Hackett would answer certain questions, it's important to look at the record. On page 784 of his Examination Before Trial (EBT), for instance, Hackett claims he'd never heard the expression "wayward girl" until John Ray said it to him. Clearly, it would be useless to ask him questions about his "home for wayward girls" when he claims to be unfamiliar with the term.

There is no indication that I know of that he is practicing medicine in Florida, where he now lives. There is no indication that I know of that he has pending lawsuits against him. The onus is on the people who make those claims to prove them (definitively), not for others to disprove them.

Oak Beach is rife with liars. Hackett, we know, lied originally about not calling Mari. Many of the rest of the residents seem to enjoy making up stories about Hackett.
Mari Gilbert always maintained she could not definitively confirm that the voice she heard on the first call from someone claiming to be Hackett was the same voice as his after hearing him in ensuing calls. That's one thing that puzzled her. So, when Hackett denied saying those things he may have been telling the truth if in fact it was not he who made that first call. As for Bruce Anderson, I would read Tom Cannings testimony carefully with regards to his son Justin's possible exaggeration of the events. As for the sedative, I agree it didn't happen. I recall the first tv interview, maybe it was 48 Hours, there was no mention of a call or a doctor giving a sedative. I'm not even sure the original is still available. It appears that snippets from the original have been used to create a newer edited version. I was glued to the news of Shannan from the first news account which reported that a dedicated website was created to help find Shannan. That website was removed by the creator & expired & then someone bought it in 2016 & redirected to a LI events site.
 

White_Rabbit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
351
Reaction score
580

PreciousDust

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
537
Reaction score
316

Looks like they've scheduled a conference for later in September, except that the order says September of last year, presumably their typo. Hackett's motion to dismiss is denied, Ray's motion against the medical examiners is denied. Also denied, and the thing I find most interesting here (for all I know it's been extensively covered and I've just missed it), is Ray's 2021 motion for information about a male body found in Manorville in 2003. For the court, Ray didn't establish that the incident is related to the case. About the body, the New York Times says this:
On Nov. 10, mushroom pickers found the body of a male, intact but in an advanced stage of decomposition. Like the first male, this one was also dumped just south of the expressway, but 11 miles east of the first. The victim was Caucasian, 35 to 50 years old, about 5-foot-6 and had died up to four months earlier.
The NY Post coverage from that time describes the victims who would later be identified as Valerie Mack and Jessica Taylor. The Gilgo Case timeline says this male was identified in 2015, with the family not wanting details published. What more do we know about the male, and do we know if Ray has talked about his perspective on seeking more information on this?
 

fred&edna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
7,628
Reaction score
32,866
Looks like they've scheduled a conference for later in September, except that the order says September of last year, presumably their typo. Hackett's motion to dismiss is denied, Ray's motion against the medical examiners is denied. Also denied, and the thing I find most interesting here (for all I know it's been extensively covered and I've just missed it), is Ray's 2021 motion for information about a male body found in Manorville in 2003. For the court, Ray didn't establish that the incident is related to the case. About the body, the New York Times says this:

The NY Post coverage from that time describes the victims who would later be identified as Valerie Mack and Jessica Taylor. The Gilgo Case timeline says this male was identified in 2015, with the family not wanting details published. What more do we know about the male, and do we know if Ray has talked about his perspective on seeking more information on this?

Very interesting!
 

PreciousDust

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
537
Reaction score
316
Here's a late-2020 article on the 2015 identification made (yet still unrevealed) for the Manorville male that John Ray unsuccessfully moved for information on. In the article, it's suggested that the victim's family should consider that revealing the identity might help catch the murderer. John Ray wasn't just refused the information in this court filing, he'd also submitted a FOIL request that was denied (presumably because of the family's wishes).

Separately, over on our sister Reddit LISK board, someone yesterday ran a one-paragraph "exclusive" where they suggest they've been told DNA has been obtained from a Manorville victim that further implicates Bittrolff. Although the writer says the DNA likely came from Jessica Taylor or Valerie Mack, most of the paragraph talks about the unidentified male and the unfulfilled FOIL request. Weird.

I can think of at least a couple of parties who could be "confidential sources" on the supposed DNA news, but it's harder to imagine what it all means.

- If Bittrolff is connected to Taylor and Mack's death, and even to the male deaths, it would be substantive but wouldn't address GB4 (or, obviously, Shannan - if there's one connection that's almost impossible to make, it's between Shannan and Bittrolff). Further, nobody would be surprised if Bittrolff was complicit in Taylor and Mack's deaths. SCPD immediately declaring Bittrolff wasn't a suspect in other cases always seemed pretty odd. Could tech innovations have provided a really recent ability to make the DNA match, or has LE just been sitting on the information (if true)?

- John Ray feels the unidentified male is part of the case; assuming Ray has some of the same "confidential sources", is he moving away from Hackett as his chief suspect?

- If the DNA leak is true, why hasn't LE filed new charges against Bittrolff? A conspiracy theorist might suggest Bittrolff ran with the same sex-fueled partiers as some Suffolk law enforcement and politicos, and that those people would certainly rather not turn over any new stones at this point. For me, the fly in that ointment is that Bittrolff, as a person and as a type, has very little in common with the those politically-connected south-shore partiers. I don't see Bittrolff rubbing elbows with that crowd, but with this case I'm always ready to be proven wrong!
 

fred&edna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
7,628
Reaction score
32,866
Here's a late-2020 article on the 2015 identification made (yet still unrevealed) for the Manorville male that John Ray unsuccessfully moved for information on. In the article, it's suggested that the victim's family should consider that revealing the identity might help catch the murderer. John Ray wasn't just refused the information in this court filing, he'd also submitted a FOIL request that was denied (presumably because of the family's wishes).

Separately, over on our sister Reddit LISK board, someone yesterday ran a one-paragraph "exclusive" where they suggest they've been told DNA has been obtained from a Manorville victim that further implicates Bittrolff. Although the writer says the DNA likely came from Jessica Taylor or Valerie Mack, most of the paragraph talks about the unidentified male and the unfulfilled FOIL request. Weird.

I can think of at least a couple of parties who could be "confidential sources" on the supposed DNA news, but it's harder to imagine what it all means.

- If Bittrolff is connected to Taylor and Mack's death, and even to the male deaths, it would be substantive but wouldn't address GB4 (or, obviously, Shannan - if there's one connection that's almost impossible to make, it's between Shannan and Bittrolff). Further, nobody would be surprised if Bittrolff was complicit in Taylor and Mack's deaths. SCPD immediately declaring Bittrolff wasn't a suspect in other cases always seemed pretty odd. Could tech innovations have provided a really recent ability to make the DNA match, or has LE just been sitting on the information (if true)?

- John Ray feels the unidentified male is part of the case; assuming Ray has some of the same "confidential sources", is he moving away from Hackett as his chief suspect?

- If the DNA leak is true, why hasn't LE filed new charges against Bittrolff? A conspiracy theorist might suggest Bittrolff ran with the same sex-fueled partiers as some Suffolk law enforcement and politicos, and that those people would certainly rather not turn over any new stones at this point. For me, the fly in that ointment is that Bittrolff, as a person and as a type, has very little in common with the those politically-connected south-shore partiers. I don't see Bittrolff rubbing elbows with that crowd, but with this case I'm always ready to be proven wrong!
Thank you for the additional info. I wanted to dig a bit further into this but my computer is on the blink making any research frustrating. Anyway, I'm mulling over this Manorville male info... it certainly has me perplexed and interested. It's an odd tidbit that doesn't easily fit with things we know/usual corrupt parties but here it is.
 

fred&edna

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
7,628
Reaction score
32,866
Thank you for the additional info. I wanted to dig a bit further into this but my computer is on the blink making any research frustrating. Anyway, I'm mulling over this Manorville male info... it certainly has me perplexed and interested. It's an odd tidbit that doesn't easily fit with things we know/usual corrupt parties but here it is.

A longshot needle in a needle stack thought but... could there be a searchable death record for this known but un-named male victim? Often the date of death would be listed as the date the body was found. Yeah, now that I'm typing it... it would be an impossible endeavor. Oh well...nevermind.
 

PreciousDust

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
537
Reaction score
316
..could there be a searchable death record for this known but un-named male victim?
There's a bit of an ethical dilemma, if there's family that truly doesn't want the name released. One starts to wonder exactly why the family would mind quite so much, and speculation begins... Anyway, it feels like there's people out there who know, and maybe the details are set to be spilt (even that Long Island Press article refers to it as a murder....how do they know that?).

My experience with New York state death records is that they're often incomplete when available, and the actual death certificates are virtually impossible to get if you're not family.
 

WINDSOR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2011
Messages
1,412
Reaction score
3,612
ORDERED that counsel for the parties are directed to appear for a compliance conference on Monday September 19,2021 at 9:30am at 1 Court Street, Room ,{-362, Riverhead, New York, in person, for the purposes of certifying this matter ready for trial, or, in the altemative, scheduling any outstanding discovery

Is anybody aware of what happened at this scheduled compliance conference?
 
Top