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.
Anyone who saw it before it was removed can still see it because it is cached, but please stop posting the dead FB link.
Thanks for clarifying this. I hope the family comes through this ordeal ok, and I hope that LE does follow up on the mom's report of a predator in the camping area.
I haven't been following this case, so I'm catching up on it all at one time. But I see that the woman and her dog have been found safe, and the family got $29,628 of free money. It's a little short of their $100,000 goal, but for two days of non-work, I'd say that's a pretty good take.
I haven't been following this case, so I'm catching up on it all at one time. But I see that the woman and her dog have been found safe, and the family got $29,628 of free money. It's a little short of their $100,000 goal, but for two days of non-work, I'd say that's a pretty good take.
They said they were going to return the money, sad that you think that's what this was about, money.
Yeah, and it took 12 pages to arrive to that glaringly obviously conclusion.
Conversely, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle once wrote (as I recall it): "When all the probabilities have been eliminated, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the solution!" Those are corner-cases, though, I strongly suspect.
Guessing no one who has answered thus far is a detective, or knows a detective. It's not a profession for geniuses, more Blue Collar, because really it's common sense and observation of the details around crime scenes and knowledge of human behavior. Observe enough of those scenes, witness and partake in enough interrogations, listen closely for a few years to your mentors, the overwhelming preponderance of circumstantial evidence leads to the same inescapable conclusion:
"all things being equal, the right solution is usually the simplest," i.e. what you wrote.
Sweat him down properly, he'll crack probably. Waterboard him, he'll tell you he started the Great Chicago Fire, though. Modern effective interrogation is a closely guarded art by intelligence agencies and police forces world-over.
This ridiculously smug post didn’t age well now did it?
The story she gave her son doesn't add up, or at least, not the version the son posted.
Quote:
She ran away downhill and knew that my dad was beeping and yelling but had to get away from this man chasing her and trying to rape her. Therefore, she stayed off the main paths and was traveling by night
OK, so, what happened that afternoon, as she was running away from the man (was she carrying the dog? Was the dog running, too? Isn't the dog crippled in one leg? And wouldn't the dog's presence (unless she was carrying him while struggling over difficult terrain) alert him to where she was? ); how did she manage to get away from him between the time he found her, and sundown? There's a huge gap in the story.
She said, she had to travel at night to get away from him, but how did she (and the dog) out-run him that initial afternoon/evening? And where did she hide all day the next day, that he couldn't find her? And how was she able to travel at night, in the dark? Did there just happen to be a full moon when she needed it? If there was good night visibility, why wouldn't he have continued to follow her, that first evening?
Oh, yeah; and what about those rattlesnakes, that deterred even LE and the SAR teams? How did she avoid those? Just lucky? No matter what happened, she's very lucky to be alive.
Yeah, and if she knew hubby was beeping and yelling, he's within earshot. Why not yell and scream to get some help from him? Why run away?
I'm not buying the story about the knife wielding man. I mean, she was running anyway, she could have just as easily run TOWARD where husband was as opposed to running the other direction. I keep hearing how she was trying to "get away" from knife man. If she feared he would catch up with her in the husband's direction, why didn't she have the same fear about him catching up with her in the opposite direction?
Also, it's not like a gun --- he would have to get very close to her hurt her with a knife. If he did grab her on the wrist, I am sure an experienced, resilient strong woman would have kicked him in the shins or something. It just doesn't add up for me.
I have a feeling there was some other reason for her wandering. Maybe she was mad at hubby and wanted to put him through a bit of grief for a few minutes, and then she truly got disoriented and lost. Or maybe she is having some weird mental thing going on. Neither of those are things she or the family would want to admit to publicly hence the insertion of a weird guy into the story.
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.
