The Gabby Petito’s family reached settlement with the parents of Brian Laundrie
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I haven't followed the specifics of this case very closely, but I'm curious to know what evidence Petito family has to support their case against Brian's parents. From what I gather, most seem to think that the parents covered for Brian, butthinking and proving that are two completely different things. Even if they were--as evil as it would make them in my book--Gabby still would have been dead when the parents were supposedly told of her death. What damages could they possibly claim from the parents concealing this point?
My personal opinion is Brian fed them a story that Gabby was hurt, just like his notebook says, he probably told his parents he ended her suffering, so they think he will get pegged for killing her, just like what happened.
They got the attorney to advise them what to do which was stay quiet which they did. That was their right.
His parents now have to live with their decision to keep quiet which had their son taking his own life. Had they spoken up he would still be alive, so they lost their kid too.
Gabby and Brian were toxic together. My opinion is they all played a part in the outcome, none of the parents stepped in to try to get them to break up.
Thanks. This could very well be the basis of the discovery motions and civil case itself. But I'd be shocked if they actually found evidence to implicate the parents beyond this. Even the Petito family attorney in that article describes the letter as "odd," but there doesn't seem to be a smoking gun from that letter in itself, IMO. We'll see what comes out, though.
My personal opinion is Brian fed them a story that Gabby was hurt, just like his notebook says, he probably told his parents he ended her suffering, so they think he will get pegged for killing her, just like what happened.
They got the attorney to advise them what to do which was stay quiet which they did. That was their right.
I was thinking he might have told them she was dead claiming they were in an argument and he bumped her, she fell back and hit her head on a rock and died. He figured no one would believe him so he hid he body and took off. Problem with that is why would they let him go camping alone if he was distraught over her death?
Other possibility is he told them they got into an argument, she went off with the friends she was planning to meet and he took off with the van. She planned on flying back in a few days. If the parents thought she was alive and all was well then I could see them letting him go off in the woods alone.
No they haven't been punished. If they had done the right thing, their son would not be dead, he would be in jail.
"Son don't say anything to the police. Let our lawyer handle this." is not an appropriate way for any parent to respond to their son murdering his girlfriend. That makes both parents accessories-after-the-fact. I can not for the life of me understand why they have not been criminally charged.
Can you please explain to us how advising/helping Brian exercise his Constitutionally protected right to remain silent and not incriminate himself is actionable in either criminal or civil court?
Can you please explain to us how advising/helping Brian exercise his Constitutionally protected right to remain silent and not incriminate himself is actionable in either criminal or civil court?
It's not. But, to be clear, that doesn't seem to be the Petitos' angle here.
It's not. But, to be clear, that doesn't seem to be the Petitos' angle here.
It's not their only angle. The Petitos are arguing that the Laundries are liable to them for intentional infliction of emotional distress because they went out and had fun while they were looking for Gabby, made a rather vague statement through their attorney about hoping she was found, and...of course, wouldn't speak to them about Gabby and forced discussions to go through their attorney.
It's not their only angle. The Petitos are arguing that the Laundries are liable to them for intentional infliction of emotional distress because they went out and had fun while they were looking for Gabby, made a rather vague statement through their attorney about hoping she was found, and...of course, wouldn't speak to them about Gabby and forced discussions to go through their attorney.
Frankly, their position is ridiculous.
I haven't read that telling Brian to be quiet is actually an angle in this case, which was my point; rather, I've just seen some posters use that point to attack the Laundrie parents as dirt bags (I take no position on the Laundrie parents with my posts here, to be clear). As for the intentional infliction of emotional distress, in order to succeed in their case, the Petito parents will have to show that the Laundrie family was lying and actually knew that the Gabby was dead and, thus, were giving them false hope based on that lie. If they can prove that, that's actually a sound legal argument, IMO. But I think that's a big if, and this case seems to be a fishing expedition based on some vague note from Roberta to Brian that doesn't actually come close to proving anything.
The Petito parents survived the motion to dismiss, but I'd be stunned--based on what seems to be available now--if they actually win their civil suit against the Laundrie parents.
I haven't read that telling Brian to be quiet is actually an angle in this case, which was my point; rather, I've just seen some posters use that point to attack the Laundrie parents as dirt bags (I take no position on the Laundrie parents with my posts here, to be clear). As for the intentional infliction of emotional distress, in order to succeed in their case, the Petito parents will have to show that the Laundrie family was lying and actually knew that the Gabby was dead and, thus, were giving them false hope based on that lie. If they can prove that, that's actually a sound legal argument, IMO. But I think that's a big if, and this case seems to be a fishing expedition based on some vague note from Roberta to Brian that doesn't actually come close to proving anything.
The Petito parents survived the motion to dismiss, but I'd be stunned--based on what seems to be available now--if they actually win their civil suit against the Laundrie parents.
No, the Petitos made the argument--among others--that the Laundrie parents were liable to them for their refusing to talk to them. As the judge noted in his ruling, this argument pretty much fell apart at the hearing on the motion to dismiss and but for the statement that was made by their attorney, he would have dismissed the case.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
