Found Deceased WY - Gabrielle ‘Gabby’ Petito, 22, Grand Teton National Park, 25 Aug 2021 #68

Status
Not open for further replies.

MistyWaters

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
10,110
Reaction score
52,293
From MSM links previously provided it is my opinion that Gabby's parents set out to do that very thing, include him in the missing person, wanted a welfare check done on him and her.
They were scared and couldn't locate either of them.

But, at some point GB's mother found out the van was back, that Brian was back, then they didnt to know where Gaby was.

They filed a missing persons report and wanted law enforcement to go to Laundries home.

Why do you think Gabby’s parents would’ve presumed her and B were at the Laudrie residence at that time?
 

10ofRods

Verified Anthropologist
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
9,907
Reaction score
128,517
Yeah, it gets messy. The bottom line, I think, is this:

"In order for the United States to obtain jurisdiction over national forest lands, "both the state and federal governments [must] agree to the transfer" of jurisdiction." Id. at 612 (quoting United States v. Johnson, 994 F.2d 980, 984 (2nd Cir.
1993))."

So basically, it looks like Wyoming has to agree to transfer jurisdiction to the US and the US has to agree to take it? I don't know. That document scrambled my brain.

It looks like the defendant in that case was arguing that the US had no jurisdiction to prosecute him and the court said either the US or the state could legally prosecute him. So, concurrent jurisdiction. At least in Michigan.

But, from reading that case, it looks like jurisdiction also depends on state law passed or not passed when the forest was established in that state in the first place. I guess we have to look to Wyoming law for that.

My opinion, which could be totally wrong. lol

Your opinion, but given what people are now posting (and sending me in DM's), I think you're right. I can see how Teton County might want to push this over into Federal Court - it would be good PR for the feds, really - and cost them much less as a percentage of their budget - I think).

Someone posted about a murder in Joshua Tree that may have been tried in San Bernardino County - I remember that one too. NP's are definitely treated as US territory, whereas NF's give the states lots of leeway to "harvest" and "use" federal lands within their state boundaries. States seem to retain primary jurisdicton.

You are kidding?

@MyBelle brought up a reasonable issue: being scared enough to have a welfare check done.

Respectfully snipped for focus

When they found out Brian was there, they were scared to death for Gabby.

So, after LE arrived at the Laundrie residence on Sept 11, surely LE reported back to Gabby's family that the van was visible in the driveway? It didn't take very long (next day?) for the van to be taken away. That gave the Laundries 10 days to remove Gabby's things (and maybe all things) from the van? LE could not have said "We saw BL," because they didn't but natural deduction tells us someone had to drive the van - and it wasn't Gabby or she'd be calling her family.

Now, we hear that BL was last seen by his parents on the 13th. I wonder if that's true. I wonder why they were confused about the dates. (Remember the whole phone buying thing and the 4th vs the 14th? Well, if he left on the 13th, then it couldn't have been the 14th when he was seen at the ATT store - unless of course...he actually was on camera there, in which case the parents aren't being forthcoming or truthful about when they last saw him).

But let's just go with ATT on the 4th (14th was some reporter's typo) and BL disappears on the 13th. Two days after LE comes to the door in search of Gabby. Surely LE asked "Is Gabby Petito here" and were then given merely a lawyer's card? Not even a "no"?

I wonder what happened in between the evening of the 11th, when BL was almost certainly in the house, and the 13th, when the Mustang was driven by someone to the W. Creek.

Am I wrong about the welfare check date?
 

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,236
Reaction score
134,360
That may be. But Gabby was only missing then, not dead. The police, at that point in time, were woefully underinformed. IMO that was by design.

The police may have been fully informed about what the parents knew, once they used the lawyer's info which was given to them.

I don't recall reading anywhere what Bertolino told the police ... when they (presumably) followed up with him.
 

RANCH

United we stand, divided we fall.
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
15,576
Reaction score
26,477
If murder is committed within the borders of a state, that state has jurisdiction. If the victim is a federal or foreign official, or if the crime took place on federal property or involved crossing state lines, or in a manner that substantially affects interstate commerce or national security, the federal government also has jurisdiction.

Is it Double Jeopardy to Charge a Crime at State and Federal Level?
 

NCWatcher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2020
Messages
1,418
Reaction score
10,602
Do you get what I’m saying ? There is a reason why hearsay is generally excluded as testimony in court because it is he really unreliable testimony. And what i am hinting at is that I am just surprised how many sleuthers take the parents’ statements at face value - as if they are true - when they have every reason to lie and IMO, have lied about their son a lot.

I don't know whether the Laundries have lied or not.

There's just no way LE can operate with the standard being "no hearsay."
For the good of society LE must take people's statements at face value in many situations. What do you think LE should have done? Broken down the door and stormed the Laundries house?
JMO
 

ce4au

Licensed Civil Engineer
Joined
Oct 30, 2019
Messages
515
Reaction score
3,865
I know the other day we were talking about whether or not the US Marshals were involved. This is an article where they interviewed a guy that was mistaken for BL & he talks about being apprehended by the US Marshals. So…I guess that answers the question about whether they’re involved or not haha. Article below.
Bounty Hunting for Brian Laundrie in a Land of Look-Alikes

ETA: the article is a good read! Kinda funny when the guy talks about when they told him to shave his beard & he “instantly regretted” that decision haha.
 

DeadCat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
421
Reaction score
299

Angels Advocate

Former Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
752
Reaction score
5,176
I don't know whether the Laundries have lied or not.

There's just no way LE can operate with the standard being "no hearsay."
For the good of society LE must take people's statements at face value in many situations. What do you think LE should have done? Broken down the door and stormed the Laundries house?
JMO

No no. My point is with WEBSLEUTHERs. I don’t understand why, knowing what we know now, we would ever assume that the parents told the truth. And I think that’s what I am asking you. Why do you take their statements at face value ?
 

Warwick7

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2018
Messages
6,315
Reaction score
73,033
Why do you think Gabby’s parents would’ve presumed her and B were at the Laudrie residence at that time?
I don't think they were expecting it.

I think they were desperate and we're reaching out to absolutely every avenue they could use to find BL and GP.

When law enforcement informed Nicole that the van was there and Brian was there, she screamed "where's my daughter!" at the cops.


Gabby's mom reveals horror reaction after learning Brian was home without her
 

imstilla.grandma

Believer of Miracles
Joined
Jul 7, 2018
Messages
16,867
Reaction score
126,335
I have a general question, what about tribal land? Can FBI/US gov't intrude on that jurisdiction? This is my curiosity--not anything else.
Tribal Matters - Indian Country & Public Lands
As sovereign entities, Indian nations are guaranteed the power and/or right to determine their form of government, define citizenship, make and enforce laws through their own police force and courts, collect taxes, regulate the domestic affairs of their citizens, and regulate property use. Federal policies, such as the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 and the Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act of 1975, have reaffirmed Indian nations’ rights to govern themselves and manage their own lands and resources.

Even so, federal, state, county and local governments often challenge American Indian sovereignty, especially when there are questions of jurisdictional authority. Many Indian reservations contain land with multiple types of ownership (trust, fee, restricted, tribal, individual Indian, non-Indian) creating a checkerboard ownership pattern. As a result, reservation lands are also under several different jurisdictions (tribal, city, county, state, federal) making it difficult for Indian nations to assert regulatory and legal control and to foster new development on their lands. Many local disagreements over land use and law enforcement between tribal nations and neighboring cities, counties and private landowners have severely compromised tribal regulatory efforts and crippled economic development.
Issues – ILTF
 

MyBelle

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
15,205
Reaction score
27,889
Surely you aren't suggesting the police say they are conducting a police welfare check when that's not true are you?

Your link above says

"Essentially, as long as they have reasonable grounds to believe that an inhabitant in a residence in endangered, they can legally enter the premises."

What reasonable grounds existed to think anyone, including Brian, was endangered inside the Laundrie home?

JMO
Welfare check, missing person check, call it whatever you want but it DID HAPPEN.

My link also clearly says: They typically knock on the door and await a response before announcing their law enforcement affiliation. If they still receive no response, they may enter the property.

On Sept. 11, LE knocked on their door and were handed their lawyer's card. That's an established fact. JMO

Timeline of events since Gabby Petito's fiancé returned to Florida becomes clearer
 

bestill

It's a Disney Day for SC Inmate 00378074
Joined
Dec 26, 2013
Messages
6,773
Reaction score
40,777
Ita.
If they had brought B. in for questioning about why his girlfriend and former fiance' never returned and her parent's could not get in touch ; and if they had cooperated with LE from the beginning when they asked to speak with Brian (& if B. wasn't at home, why not tell LE he wasn't there ?) -- they would not have any protester's outside on the street.
It's that simple.
Even now they could take mitigating steps.

We don't know what Brian told the parents.
What if he confessed to them ?
1.) All the parents have to do is to make a public statement saying they are aware that Gabby was murdered and make an apology to her family for the actions of their son.
2.) Or at the very least -- if they know where Brian is -- produce him, and say that he needs to answer LE truthfully and go from there.
Again it's not rocket science, and would go a long way towards mending the public view of them.
Which at the moment is doing poorly.
The Laundries' can steps towards changing the public perception of them by cooperating with LE.
Imo.

And imagine where Gabby's family would be had they done any of that. They are angry now and rightfully so.
 

OceanElix

Active Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2021
Messages
58
Reaction score
191
Why do you think Gabby’s parents would’ve presumed her and B were at the Laudrie residence at that time?

Would a welfare check by LE automatically be carried out at the last known residence? ....even though, as far as Gabby's family were aware, they were several states away on their road trip?

Do we know, did JP not go to the Laundrie's house at all or just not go on the 10th?
He lives in the same state so you'd think he would pop over in the car and knock if he couldn't get an answer by calling and texting but he called the police.
So I wonder did something happen or did he find out something particularly concerning in those days 9/10/11th just before getting the police involved?
IIRC I've read the Laundries made couple of police calls around 9/10th.

MOO
 

Bluebythec

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Messages
568
Reaction score
5,880
Taking a look back here, I'm still curious as to why the bodycam video from Ranger Melissa Hulls hasn't been released. Could it be that something said by either Gabby or the Ranger was such a red flag that it would open the National Park Service to some sort of civil suit?
 

Panda1989

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2021
Messages
79
Reaction score
575
Do you mean, did she have all those jobs? She may have at different times, or maybe some of them are incorrect. They all appear to involve food, and IIRC at one point she described herself as a nutritionist. In the vanlife videos she shows herself preparing food. Though she may not have had formal training in food and nutrition, it did seem to be an interest of hers.

JMO

Yes, that is my question. Between the news articles and the Moab stop, it just seems it is all over the place where she worked. I originally read they both worked at Publix to save up money for the VanLife trips. She stated she was working at juice bar/nutritionist at the Moab stop. But now 50 hour work weeks at Taco Bell are thrown in. I guess it's not super important where she worked at what time. If they both worked at Publix together, it would be nice to know if any co-workers ever saw any kinds of arguments between them, tension, etc. It could give us more insight of their relationship from the coworker's eyes, if anything was ever notable.
 

NCWatcher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2020
Messages
1,418
Reaction score
10,602
You are kidding?

@MyBelle brought up a reasonable issue: being scared enough to have a welfare check done.

Cheryl Bereth did it for Kelsey because she could not reach her.

Susan Watts' friend called and requested a welfare check because she absolutely could not reach Shannon.

Family members of Susan Powell asked Police to do a welfare check shortly before Josh and the boys turned up. These family members could absolutely not reach Susan.

Originally Gsbby's parents were scared that both Brian and Gabby couldn't be located. It didn't help when Laundries refuse to take their desperate calls and texts for help.

When they found out Brian was there, they were scared to death for Gabby.

No, I wasn't kidding.

A welfare check is done when there's a reasonable suspicion a person in a particular house needs help or is dead. Not knowing where GP was doesn't lead to the reasonable suspicion she was at the Laundries. Police action was needed but not disguised as a welfare check to get around the need for warrants. Being scared isn't grounds for a warrantless welfare check if there's no reason to think the person is in a particular location.

JMO
 

Angels Advocate

Former Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
752
Reaction score
5,176
Would a welfare check by LE automatically be carried out at the last known residence? ....even though, as far as Gabby's family were aware, they were several states away on their road trip?

Do we know, did JP not go to the Laundrie's house at all or just not go on the 10th?
He lives in the same state so you'd think he would pop over in the car and knock if he couldn't get an answer by calling and texting but he called the police.
So I wonder did something happen or did he find out something particularly concerning in those days 9/10/11th just before getting the police involved?
IIRC I've read the Laundries made couple of police calls around 9/10th.

MOO

I really don’t know if JP physically went there or not. But I would think he must have restrained himself due to a fear he might exact vengeance too soon if you know what I mean.
 

tiara1972

On Time Out
Joined
May 9, 2012
Messages
328
Reaction score
1,345
Do you get what I’m saying ? There is a reason why hearsay is generally excluded as testimony in court because it is he really unreliable testimony. And what i am hinting at is that I am just surprised how many sleuthers take the parents’ statements at face value - as if they are true - when they have every reason to lie and IMO, have lied about their son a lot.
From the information I have access to, they have said absolutely nothing (I don't even know what their voices sound like and hardly know what they look like).

Do we have a single direct quote from them? It could very well be that I have missed such a thing, though, and I realize that all too well.

Do you have a source that shows they have "lied about their son a lot"?
 

Bluebythec

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2015
Messages
568
Reaction score
5,880
No, I wasn't kidding.

A welfare check is done when there's a reasonable suspicion a person in a particular house needs help or is dead. Not knowing where GP was doesn't lead to the reasonable suspicion she was at the Laundries. Police action was needed but not disguised as a welfare check to get around the need for warrants. Being scared isn't grounds for a warrantless welfare check if there's no reason to think the person is in a particular location.

JMO

Do we know where Gabby's home of record was? Is the Laundrie address listed on her driver's license or the van registration?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top