Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by FrostOwl, Nov 29, 2020.
Deleted due to double post. Arrrgh!
Snipped and BBM
Ah, @stmarysmead, thank you for yet again reminding us of all these details.
From this, I understand now Esther wrote "I think I can see you" on two consecutive days.
Had she done so twice on the same day, I'd agree with @PeggyHenry (upthread) that Esther could have thought she really saw Dan.
But to write that on two separate days? Surely it's an inside endearment between them, or perhaps tricks of a fragile mind.
Are we able to suggest what other explanation there might possibly be?
I think it's a little jokey thing they say to each other. When my friend I and were on holidays at a look-out point or view we always used to joke "I think I can see your house from here".
Of course we'd be in another country from where we lived, but it was a little in-joke. Same thing here with Dan and Esther.
Let’s look at these conversations in view of our own lives. Pretend you have a partner you have been living with for many years...you share a home, pets, and finances. Moreover you share a business...writing books. Around the time you and your partner start getting some excellent publicity for your books, including a very exciting interview with BBC that could prove very beneficial for book sales...you decide to go hiking for a month. You post many times though about your puppy books, hoping for sales. The success of the books, by these posts, seem a desired and important goal.
Two days before the BIG interview airs on BBC, you are up on a Pic in the Pyrenees and you have a chance to text and/or Skype your partner. Wouldn’t you be bursting with things to say, questions to ask? I mean your partner is living in the world, the life, you DO plan to return to, right? So your interests should not just be the next mountain or refuge.
(Now look at what ED says. There’s not one question. Not one comment of substance to this man she shares her life and business interests with!)
Think what questions, concerns you might pose in this brief m0ment of contact...
Then...If after this brief exchange, you are unable to be in contact with your significant other (who is also your business partner) for over 26 hours, and you know that you may be out of range going forward for a significant time...would you still have no curiosity about anything...not your partner, the dogs, the BIG interview, the book sales, friends...NOTHING?
This is my problem. It just does not make sense. All my opinions only,,,
It just crystallized for me: IMO she shows no interest in the life she left behind.
Unless messages about the interview/books have been left out of the dossier. But then why? Because it shows she wasn't as comfortable with things as we are made to believe?? MOO
Snipped for focus....
I'm imagining DC was actually in Benasque. Or he could have been in Luchon on the way to hike up into the Refuge area from the France side where the Hospice is.
ED could have been literal, not delusional. Or literal in the sense he's at arms' length down in the valley.
DC has clearly been very selective about the text message he has released in the dossier, so there may well have been more mundane ones I guess. Although I wonder if the reason he didn't release his half of the conversation is that it would show that he was perhaps messaging about the BBC interview etc, and she was completely uninterested? Also anyone have any idea why she was hitching rather than driving the van up to the start of the trail - are the roads not suitable for a campervan?
I think she was speaking literally. We can pass it off as an affectionate little saying they shared but that doesn’t ring true to me. Has anyone ever heard people say ‘ I think I can see you!’ used in that way? There are sayings that would fit that explanation such as ‘ I look at the moon and see you’, ‘ I can see you in the clouds’ but bearing in mind they spend the majority of time together when did they have opportunity to develop that little saying.
She’s looking down from a mountain top and can see tiny figures below, maybe she sees one with DC’s jacket colour and she says ‘ I think I can see you’. That would indicate she’s expecting him and she knows he’s on his way. Or she’s feeling a bit paranoid ... she’s doing her best to give herself distance from the relationship and every time she looks down and sees a tiny figure climbing in the distance she thinks it might be DC. Basically she’s looking for him to respond and say ‘ not me Esther, I’m a 100 miles away!’ . JMO
But I shall reread the text of her messages which SMM has displayed for us .. thanks so much!!
Then I’m going to re-read the first announcement that DC made on FB when he alerted readers she was missing. I keep thinking I must do this since that was the first thing that stirred my intense interest in this case!
Just wanted to clear up the Sweden thing since nobody seems to have twigged yet - the mountain/area Esther climbed on those days is called Turbon. There is also a Turbon near Sundsvall. I have checked on FB and if you type in Turbon it default tags to the Swedish location.
I assume their entire WhatsApp conversation from that day has been released, for you to make such a damning statement about what Esther did or didn’t say to Dan. Can you post it here, please?
In terms of the 'whats app' conversation, we have been shown what DC has wanted us to see. We have seen nothing that he doesn't want us to see. Parts have been selected, presumable for a specific reason. Esther has had no say in what we have been able to see.
No, it hasn’t been released but I liked your post because you bring up an excellent point. If Dan had had other conversations with her, why did he not include them just as he did the WhatsApp post.
In other words, he says:
16:07 – Video Call with Dan lasting for 1:36
If there were other calls, he could have kept them private and yet included them the same way...”video call with Dan lasting 5:03” for example.
So why not? He’s precise enough to add that quick call at 16:07...why purposely omit any other conversations?
IMO, there were no other calls or he would have presented them in that way if desiring privacy.
As to..what Esther did or did not say...it is entirely reported by Dan. He controls that narrative too. So it certainly is not ‘damning’ of him or Esther...we are discussing the information he provided us. Her state of mind is as important to the discussion as her state of hiking attire.
In that information that Dan provided, on the last two days before she disappears, something quite monumental in their business life was happening! Something that could really propel the sale of their books. While on this trip, Esther’s several of her own posts are directed to readers...asking them to consider buying the books. I can bring those posts here for review...but easy reading on their FB. Check out the two Nov 20 posts...2 days before she disappears. She is pushing for sales of these books.
These posts indicate the success of the books is important to her. Yet on the day before and day of a really big marketing ‘get’...the BBC interview...she only makes minimal small talk with her business partner about the mountains. It’s like her life is only in the mountains. She has no curiosity about her life off the mountains at all.
According to Dan, Esther is preparing to c0me down from the mountains. She’s re-entering their life together...one of a shared home, shared finances, shared friends, and a business that has taken a big leap forward in making them better known to the general public. But she doesn’t make ONE reference to that life at all. Or ask one question. Wouldn’t someone posting several times in prior weeks, asking the few followers they had to buy those books, be curious if there had been any uptick in sales due to this great BBC showcase interview?
Dan tells us comments like “I think I can see you!” ...so why would he purposely omit the mundane questions a returning spouse and business partner would have? IMO, I don’t think he would...because they would underscore her interest and emotional involvement in their life together...off the mountain. In some ways, much more than the “love you so much” posts do.
‘Just my opinion. Oh, and GREAT work on the Sundsvall explanation. I do so admire the great posters on this thread.
When DC announces Esther is missing on Facebook, he refers to the last time she was seen
' six days ago when she sent me this photo'.
I am just wondering why he didn't say, ' six days ago when she videocalled' me from .....'
Having a phone conversation is very different from being sent a selfie. I think it has now been widely reported that she spoke to DC from the Pic. I am guessing she sent the selfie to him which prompted a video call.
Maybe I'm being too picky here -just that if my loved one was missing and the last time I'd spoken to him was a certain day, I would surely say when I last spoke to him - rather than he sent me a picture of him....
I'm emphasising this point because if a person is missing then it is pertinent to an investigation that someone had a conversation with them, bearing i mind that selfies and posting pictures can be done by another person manipulating the 'phone etc.
The BBC interview was with a local branch, Tyne & Wear. No less, and no more.
Hardly worldwide coverage with, say, Oprah.
One should not make more out of it than there is, yet I feel this is what is happening
It did appear on the front page of the app though. So anyone accessing BBC news app could have seen it. I certainly read it in Lancashire. In the earlier threads it was discussed that a lot of us had read the story and then found ourselves here some days later.
But it was on the main BBC news page - that's certainly where I saw it. It was there to be seen by any of the 14m weekly visitors to that page, so it was kind of a big deal in terms of publicity.
Hardly wordwide, no, but it was definitely national UK coverage - it was published on the main page of the BBC News website not just restricted to Tyne & Wear. According to Bbc.co.uk Traffic, Ranking & Marketing Analytics | SimilarWeb it's the 5th ranked website in the UK so that's a pretty big audience.
I’m in the US and I read it.
A friend and I had a business together for quite a few years. We would have been thrilled with the local coverage they’d started getting...but absolutely over the moon, if we had been featured by national news. So few people have such a stroke of luck! Think of all the struggling authors...”full many a flower is born to blush unseen, and waste its sweetness on the desert air.” (Thomas Gray)
This wasn’t happenstance. They’d been working hard to achieve coverage of their lives in order to sell their books.
It doesn’t matter how WE view the interview...because it’s not Oprah...to a couple with a small business this should have been a wonderful, exciting advancement of their goals and dreams. Something wonderful for Esther to come home to.
But she doesn’t even mention it. Or if she does in the last video call, Dan chooses to keep that private...while publicly repeating her personal endearments to him.
One last thought, if Dan reads here...what area of our discussions might give him hope? I don’t think he’d be offended in the least that we discuss clues to ED’s state of mind...or that her disappearance might be related to her state of mind and not a terrible accident or a homicidal fellow hiker. Why...because that theory offers at least a semblance of hope that she is alive somewhere and he will see her again some day.