Tuesday, November 8, 2016

Missing: Sherri Papini



Sherri Papini, 34, of Redding, CA was last seen jogging in her neighborhood on the morning of Wednesday, November 2. 
Family members sounded the alarm later that day, when they learned that Sherri hadn't picked her two children up at daycare, which was completely out of character. 

With family members, we sometimes see an internal battle of acceptance, denial, hope and despair within their words. 

"She absolutely loved and adored her children and did anything for them," Sheila Koester, Sherri's sister, told Dateline NBC. 

Here, the sister references her in the past tense and later in the present tense.  With past tense references of missing persons we look at:

1.  The circumstances of the disappearance 
2.  The age of the victim 
3.  The subject's age
4.  The subject's relation to the victim; including quality of relationship
5.  The amount of time that has elapsed from the event to the statement 

Here we have sister relationship with the past tense reference, the sister is clearly concerned that the missing person may not be found alive.  

Relationship quality has much to do with language, with a mother of a missing child representing the strongest bond, the strongest denial, and the slowest processing and acceptance time lapse.  

We also look at the verbs, themselves.  "Loved" and "adored" speak to qualities that we expect to be ongoing.  "Doing" for the children can only be past tense since she, while missing, is incapable of actively doing anything for the kids.  Emotions, however, are different.  Even missing, the mother does not stop "loving" her children, as seen in the language of others.  When it does, the indication of death enters.  This can be knowledge, fear, doubt, and even inner conflict.  

Circumstances can include not only what is known to the public, but any information investigators have shared.  It is quite broad, including the quality of the neighborhood, news reports of such things such as sex offenders or violent crime, and so on.  

Sheila said Sherri was training for an upcoming race where participants dress in superhero clothes and run to raise money for disadvantaged children. 

"She is a bright, bubbly, intelligent, beautiful and loving mother," Sheila told Dateline. 

Here is the missing person as a person, herself, described in the present tense.  As a mother comes last in order.  

Authorities continue to follow up on leads and, in a Shasta County News Release, labeled Sherri's disappearance as "suspicious circumstances/at risk." 

Here we see more doubt creeping in:  

"She's a beloved mother, she would never leave her children.  We miss her. And if I was speaking to Sherri, I would want her to know that we are looking for her and we are not giving up." 

The plural "we" by the sister is appropriately used, including the raising of money for the search efforts.  

When a spouse goes missing, a husband can go on the defensive, particularly if there have been issues within the marriage:


'Everybody who knows my wife knows that there's no reason for her to leave,' he added.

'Knowing that she didn't pick up our kids -  there is no way that ever happens.' 

This opens discussion about issues within the marriage, which is why the need to separate the children away from any "reason" is used.  

If one goes missing and there is an issue within the marriage, the issue is magnified.  

Papini said that he'd traced his wife's cell phone using an app that locates lost phones and found it on the side of a road. 


He said: 'She could drop her phone but she would never in a million years not pick up our children on a time that she normally would have.'

The word "normally" here indicates the pattern of being on time to pick up the children and the obvious break in the pattern.  Not only did she not show up, but her attention to detail is to not be late.  

Peoples' attachment to phones is powerful; here it is compared to picking up the children.  

Indictions of such often point to 'other' reasons why she might leave, but not the children.  Keep in mind possible marital issues when viewing the statements; marital issues are common.  The emphasis on her "never" leaving her children suggests that even if there were marital problems, her devotion to her children would have superseded all other priorities for Sherri.  

Note:  "our children" is to show a need to share; something that creeps into the language of those who are divorced, or married couples who have talked about possible separation.  

Anyone with information on Sherri Papini is asked to call the Shasta County Sheriff's office at 530-245-6540 or the Sheriff's Major Crimes Unit at 530-245-6135. Tips can also be submitted via email to mcu@co.shasta.ca.us or call 530-243-2319. 


128 comments:

Anonymous said...

Husband seems awfully calm for having his wife missing for five days

Saint Theresa said...

Off topic
Please check this out!
Secret pedo language, and podesta pizza...
https://youtu.be/lusSfBW44YU

Anonymous said...

“Everybody who knows my wife knows that there’s no reason for her to leave ... She was definitely taken against her will,” Keith Papini

“I received a text message from her at 10:37 a.m. that day asking me if I was coming home for lunch,” Keith Papini said. “I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on my job. So I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. that day.”

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/husband-missing-california-mom-sherri-papini-thinks-abducted/story?id=43348426

-KC

Anonymous said...

"If she is listening I want to say, 'We are trying, we are trying the best we can and I am sorry I'm not there,'" Keith said while crying. "I'm coming honey. I am trying, I'm doing everything I can and I love you."

"It's the worst thing in the world," Keith paused and continued to say,"I never, it's never, it's the worst thing ever,"

"It's hard waiting you know, you are waiting for a phone call, you're waiting for something to tell us this is the directions, or this is the house, or this is the car and that is very difficult right now."

SOURCE: http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/shasta/husband-talks-about-missing-wife-ask-for-her-safe-return/145248010

-KC

Anonymous said...

Peter said:
"Peoples' attachment to phones is powerful; here it is compared to picking up the children."


"She could drop her phone..." seems unnecessary..
Peter: Is it sensitive? Does he have knowledge of her cell phone and how it ended up on the side of the road?
SLH

Anonymous said...

Peter... this statement makes me suspicious. Can you comment on it?

She was definitely taken against her will,” Keith Papini ... "I never, it's never, it's the worst thing ever,"

How can he be so sure, unless he was there or knew it would happen?

-KC

John mcgowan said...

lynda said...
OT..

Sherri Papini

There are conflicting reports. A neighbor said they saw her on that day around 2PM walking on road. But then they say it could have been 11AM.

All it means is someone saw her during the day.

I still can't get over the "I know she's screaming"

Hi

I've been following this case. He has made a few statements. His language in parts are concerning, "I know she's screaming" to name but a few.

I see guilt, and distancing language. (not geographical) Was their marriage on the rocks before she went missing?

Anonymous said...

And/or is he trying to introduce the idea that she merely "dropped" her phone?
SLH

Buckley said...

More quotes from Papini's sister:

- "I think we exhausted the resources that we have out here to search for her," Koester said. "We are trying to reach out to national news and social media networks. ... We feel that it's moved to where she's been taken from this area, and everyone in the nation needs to be looking."

- "Family members and friends wishing to help in the search efforts can contact Koester via Facebook messenger, she said.
“It’s hard for me to filter through all the posts right now,” Koester said.

-"He returned to the home later in the evening, around 5, and no one was here,” Koester said. “He called the authorities immediately."

-“She was out for a run. She wouldn’t leave her babies,” said her sister Sheila Koester, 36, the Ventura County Star reported.

-"She's a beloved mother, she would never leave her children," Sheila told Dateline. "We miss her. And if I was speaking to Sherri, I would want her to know that we are looking for her and we are not giving up."

Buckley said...

Flagged this one because of "the home"...and the latter part:

"He returned to the home later in the evening, around 5, and no one was here,” Koester said. “He called the authorities immediately."

She seems to downplay search efforts but be firm in his actions.

Ney said...

This reminds me of the Leanne Bearden case.

lynda said...

Thank you Peter for looking at this case...I'm going to bring over the statements made by the husband that are concerning if you would take a look...or anyone else please..

John McGowan..

According to everything out there thusfar..the marriage was "perfect"



Direct transcribing of husbands interview shown in parts...

“I’m coming honey, I’m trying, I’m doing everything I can, and uh,...I love you.”


“And normal days, that, I would open the door and my family’s comes runs and give me a hug”


“That’s when I knew she’d been, in my opinion, taken or abducted.”


“It’s the worst thing in the world. I’m not, I’ve, I’ve , it, it’s never, it’s the worst thing. Ever.”


“It’s hard waiting you know , you’re waiting, you’re waiting for a phone call, you’re waiting for something to tell us , you know, this is the direction, or this is the house, or this is the car, and uh, er, that is, that is very difficult right now.”


“If she was listening, I would want her to say we’re trying, and, um, uhhh, we’re trying the best we can and I’m so sorry I’m not there.”


“Bring her home, bring her home, just bring her home, bring her home safe. There’s a 50,000 reward, just bring her home.”


“She was definitely taken. Against her will.”


“I received a text message from her @ 10:37 a.m. that day, asking me if I was coming home from lunch. I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on, on my job so, I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. later that day”


“She could drop a phone but she would never , in a million years, you know, not pick up our children ON the time that she normally would of.

"Cuz I know she's screaming for me right now and I can't, I don't know where you are."

"I wish I could individually meet with every single person and just give em a big hug. Ah, it's, it's been very hard to see all these fa, ya know, family and friends and people wanting to help and not being able to ta, take the time to thank them personally"

lynda said...

Buckley said...
Flagged this one because of "the home"...and the latter part:

"He returned to the home later in the evening, around 5, and no one was here,” Koester said. “He called the authorities immediately."

She seems to downplay search efforts but be firm in his actions.

November 8, 2016 at 1:14 PM

__________________________

Poor reporting here. When he returned home and found no one there, according to him, he searched the house and then called the daycare and found out the children had not been picked up.
Then he used the find my phone app to locate Sherri's phone and finds it by the side of the road about 1/4 mile from the house.
THEN he called LE.

They have not released the 911.

My big question was Why didn't he call HER? In his story, not once, does he say he tried to call her phone.

Nic said...

“That’s when I knew she’d been, in my opinion, taken or abducted.”

Whoa.

"in my opinion" is a new one. Weaking to the enth degree.

jmo (ha!)


lynda said...

Nic said...
“That’s when I knew she’d been, in my opinion, taken or abducted.”

Whoa.

"in my opinion" is a new one. Weaking to the enth degree.

jmo (ha!)



November 8, 2016 at 3:45 PM
________________________

Is that true Nic? Does IMO weaken a statement? I feel that the husband is really "pushing" the kidnapping story in lieu of any other explanation. He is not entertaining at all that she could have just taken off because "Ask anyone, she had no reason to leave."

Buckley said...

Lynda- I agree poor reporting but Sherri's sister was the one who said it, who stated husband called 911 immediately upon returning home, even though hubby clearly contradicts that and says he searched first. Or are you saying they cut out the middle of her quotation? I agree that his not saying he called her is big. Good catch!

I think IMO weakens it, but if we assume he doesn't KNOW for sure, it can reveal uncertainty, not guilt.

Shannon Duane said...

I read a comment on another site where someone had heard from someone else who lives in the area that the husband needs exactly 30k to take time off from work for his grieving. The go fund me is for 30k, and it's already hit that.

Now I want to point out that this woman appears to have been a stay at home mom, meaning her disappearance wouldn't by itself cost the family anything in terms of loss of income.

But I can understand taking time off work...except I looked this guy up (Keith papini), and found his LinkedIn. It says he's an "exceptional services specialist" (maybe it was expert...can't remember off the top of my head exact word but it was something like that) at Best Buy. I looked up that title and nothing comes up...but it's pretty clear from his resume on LinkedIn that he's basically a Best Buy repair guy...geek squad guy...a pretty basic job. He's been there 11 years, but he can't make more than 40k per YEAR (maybe he makes more with commission).

But my point is that he doesn't have a job where 30k is like two months salary. It's more like SIX MONTHS PLUS for a guy with his job.

If that comment was right, this guy needs 30k so he doesn't have to work bc he's emotionally distraught. People just paid this guy to take a 6 month plus leave. I'm sorry but that is beyond anything reasonable. Two months, maybe. After that, you need to go back to work. I don't know, maybe I'm being harsh (because I do understand emotional distress if he's innocent) but to preemptively conclude you need like 6 months off is just weird to me.

Shannon Duane said...

That's what I think.

Shannon Duane said...

Keith Papini said he became suspicious after his wife did not pick up their kids — ages 2 and 4 — from child care, as she usually did. He used the Find My iPhone app to locate his wife's cell phone, but she was nowhere to be found. Her earbuds were still attached to the phone, with strands of hair stuck to them, NBC News reported.

"That's when I knew she had been taken or abducted, in my opinion," Keith told KRCR.
-------------------

I'm sorry, but that just sounds weird to me. Guy gets home, doesn't find his wife (and I'm Soooo curious why the daycare wasn't calling all over the place when the kids weren't picked up...wouldn't they have called the dad?? That's what my daughter's school does if someone is even 5 minutes late...they call everyone in her "list" of authorized pick up adults), then doesn't say anything about calling wife to see if she's out shopping with kids or something (that's not in ANY article - that he tried calling her), does the find my iPhone thing (and I'd like to point out that I can find all of MY devices with that app but I CANNOT find my husband's phone because we have separate iCloud accounts like most people...and you have to authorize the other person to see where your phone is...so this feels a bit controlling to me, but I know other couples do like to see where their spouse is so I won't call this totally weird), and then he goes right to the dropped phone which wouldn't have ringed when you ask it to ring on the find my iPhone app because the headphones were attached (So for him to find the phone he'd either have had to know where it was, saw the light going off even though there'd be no sound, or saw it super out in the open and not hidden in grass or something...by the app gets you to the general AREA but you usually have to ring the phone and locate it by following the SOUND...which wouldn't be there bc of the headphones), and THEN he calls the police at like 7:50, two hours after he got home. And he IMMEDIATELY knew she'd been "taken" when he found her phone.

I'm just getting more and more suspicious of this guy...

Anonymous said...

Shannon,

There are child care costs. A stay-at-home mother's value is pretty high when there are kids to care for and a home to keep up. She was considered to be a supermom, which means she did everything, and probably very efficiently. It usually means the husband is not at all supermom-like because he married his opposite. I would guess he's a low-key low energy introvert, which means he needs child-care, nanny and housekeeping help. He will go crazy at home trying to make sure the kids are taken care of properly, laundry, food, medicine when they get sick, housework. He is guaranteed to be completely overwhelmed unless he has family come in and do everything. I'm guessing he was overwhelmed and under-performing in his family life and maybe his paycheck, too.

Two questions: is/was the woman pregnant? Was there any life insurance? Does he have any men friends?

Anonymous said...

Husband, while his eyes well up with tears, and he stumbles over his own words: "Bring her home. Bring her home. Bring her home. Bring her home safe. There's a $50,000 reward. Bring her home."

Q: What would you say to her if she could hear you?

"I'm coming, Honey? I'm trying? I'm doing everything I can? And, um, I love you?"

He's a liar and an actor. He's giving himself away with his performance, his over-wrought tearful trembling like a leaf, soooo "beside himself".

He's not going to get away with it. He's so guilty he acts just like a little kid who got caught! Shaking his head "no", tears flowing, and the word "never" popping randomly out of his mouth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym3ruN0ClDU

Buckley said...

It is very expensive to raise children. If he works full time, as a single parent, he'll have extra child care expenses. Perhaps the gofundme wording is poor, but his life has just changed drastically. He will need time to adjust.

lynda said...

Shannon,

According to the husband, HE called the daycare when he couldn't find anyone. Why, I don't know. The daycare told him the kids hadn't been picked up yet. She wasn't LATE picking them up, the daycare is open until 6PM. He then states that he called another family member to pick up kids, used the find i phone and miraculously found her phone 1/4 mile from the home. Then, he called police.

Anonymous said...

I hate to bust all of your "Super Detective" bubbles, but there is nothing yet to conclude "deception indicated" from the husband AND there is a serial killer who likes to kill female joggers who has already killed in multiple states and HAS NOT BEEN CAUGHT. Who's to say he didnt kill this CA jogger?

Anonymous said...

If I were working for the FBI, I would think serial killer with this case. His last kill, he took the phone and earbuds...it seems he left them behind in this case to try to throw off investigators. If there are strands of hair in the earbuds, the killer may have ripped them out of her ears.

Buckley said...

Find iPhone can be precise. I've used it to find my phone in a room of my work building several times.

Anonymous said...

If she was last seen jogging, what are the odds the husband did it?

Anonymous said...

Question though: If she was a stay at home Mom, why would the kids be in day care? Just to give her a break?

Nic said...

lynda said:
Is that true Nic?


I think it is. The quote is out of context, but just looking at it bald, it appears like a lot of words to say his wife is gone, He is not reporting what happened, he is reporting his opinion. i.e., I came home and my wife was gone. The kids were still at school waiting for her to pick them up. I called everyone I know and no one has seen her. etc., etc. Saying what his opinion is leaves others to have their own opinion as to what they think they know.

Look at how many words are between what he "knew" and taken (or) abducted. There is a lot of distancing compounded by the passive verb tense. jmo

Someone more experienced could explain it better.

Nic said...

*what they think happened.

tania cadogan said...

Investigators searching for the missing California mom feared kidnapped while jogging said Tuesday that despite spotting a few physical clues, scouring surveillance footage and upping the reward for new information to $50,000 has not led them significantly closer to finding her.

Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko said Sherri Papini, the 34-year-old mother of two, was last seen around 2 p.m. in her neighborhood running about 1 1/2 miles away from Interstate 5. Papini had sent a text message to her husband Keith asking him whether he’d be home for lunch, Koester said. He said he wouldn’t.

Her husband said that he used Apple’s “Find My iPhone” and found her phone on the ground of a route she normally runs. Bosenko said strands of Papini’s long blonde hair and her earbuds were located during the search, KRCRTV.com reported.

Relatives have said they believe whoever kidnapper her took her away from the area.

Authorities are sorting through 150 tips so far. There is a $50,000 reward for information in the case.

Her family said that jogging in the area is routine for Papini. She then picks up her two children from daycare in the afternoon and then spends the rest of the day gardening with them or doing other projects.

Papini is described as being 5 feet 3 inches tall and weighing about 100 pounds. She was last seen wearing pink running clothes, deputies said.

“I think we exhausted the resources that we have out here to search for her,” Sheila Koester, Sherri’s sister told Redding.com.“We are trying to reach out to national news and social media networks…We feel that it’s moved to where she’s been taken from this area, and everyone in the nation needs to be looking.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/08/earbuds-hair-found-in-hunt-for-california-mom-who-vanished-while-jogging.html

Anonymous said...

I agree with everyone's thoughts here. The reason I think the husband killed her is because of HIS FLASHING NEON SIGN that says "I KILLED HER". If he had hidden, and made no statements, I wouldn't have this opinion.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 6:02,

I'm a full-time mom. Both of my kids were in nursery school twice a week, both on the same day/time slot once my youngest was 2.5. I relished the 2 hours to do errands solo or even just hit Chapters, have a coffee, and decompress. I know another full-time mom who has always had a cleaning lady come in once a week and do her laundry for her. She was very involved in her kids' schools and they could afford it.

Here, everyone gets to go home at 5:00pm and then it's a lifestyle; everyone is equally responsible. That's how we do it.

Anonymous said...

Nic, Chill out...it was a question. Not a judgement. I understand Mom's need breaks...my question was intended to find out more info about what specifically happened that day and why.

I have friends who pay cleaning people to do laundry and change bedding etc. No way in hell is anyone but me doing my laundry or changing/making my bed lol...thats stuff has gotta be done an exact certain way! As far as if I had money to pay someone to clean the bathrooms, I would do that in a heartbeat bc I just hate doing it.

Anonymous said...

Best comments from ME2l. Always.

Nic said...

Anonymous @ 6:48pm
Nic, Chill out...it was a question.


I wasn't being defensive. Interesting that you took it that way.

Anonymous said...

Of course you werent being defensive about your mothering. Youre a man.

Anonymous said...

Whats up with all the peeps on facebook bragging like 3 year olds that they voted and putting their "I Voted" stickers on alcoholic beverages?!?! Are these people in elementary school they need a sticker?! Yay youre drinking!!! Oh my God youre all grown up! Let me clap like a f&ckin seal for you you!!!!

Anonymous said...

"Bring her home."

That's a statement to someone who knows/shares same idea of "HOME".

Sentence "Bring her home." assumes person spoken to shares/knows same home.

That's what I said to my ex-husband after our divorce, and he had moved out with our cat. It didn't go well for her (the cat), and I told him "Bring her home."

Anonymous said...

"Bring her home"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym3ruN0ClDU

Anonymous said...

"Bring her home" was the most honest thing he could say (guilty people under pressure want to tell the truth, right?). "Bring her home, bring her home, bring her home" Umm "Home"? That guy is so feeling the pressure he's crying a river and I predict he will NOT get away with her murder. Yes I made an assumption in the previous sentence. That guy is SO GUILTY!

Anonymous said...

Because he said "Bring her home?"?!?! Oh wow you are stupid.

Anonymous said...

He's a liar and an actor. He's giving himself away with his performance, his over-wrought tearful trembling like a leaf, soooo "beside himself".

He's not going to get away with it. He's so guilty he acts just like a little kid who got caught! Shaking his head "no", tears flowing, and the word "never" popping randomly out of his mouth.

Anonymous said...

Watch first few minutes, then go to 1:50 for the staged shot of him cuddling with his sister, and then his bizarre statements "I'm coming, Honey? I'm trying? I'm doing everything I can? And, um, I love you?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym3ruN0ClDU

Anonymous said...

I just watched the video. Inside Edition made the same connection I did with the jogger serial killer. Also, that self-defense guy gave crappy advice in the attacked from behind simulation. When that guy grabbed her from behind she should have stamped on top of his foot bone as hard as she could. The pain would have been so intense he would have released his grip on her and she could then run from him. There is a good chance the stomp would break his foot bone since the bone on top of the foot is the weakest bone in the body. preveting him from pursuing. If you want good self-defense advice go to a martial arts expert who specializes in shotokan karate. I took a class in that and the instructor taught us how to disable an attacker who grabs us from behind both standing and lying down. That guys advice on Inside Edition is pointless.

Anonymous said...

The crying husband is gay. I will have a further look at his statements.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

She texted him at 10:37 a.m. He didn't respond until 1:39 p.m. and felt the need to explain why he didn't promptly respond (before he was asked).

He said he responded at 1:39 p.m., which is close to the around 2:00 sighting of her jogging. How far is his work from their home? From her "normal" jogging route? If he knows her route, knows precisely when she picks up the children, then he also knows when she leaves to go jogging and how long she takes (particularly if she's been in training for this race). How many minutes would it take to run 1/4 mile from their house? Did the husband make any other calls or send other texts from his phone that day? How about calls from the office phone? Computer-based texts or e-mails? The window between when he says he responded to her text until the last sighting is roughly 11-20 minutes.

His reason for not responding earlier to her 10:37 a.m. text was because "I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on my job. So I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. that day.”- If he usually does not, what was different about this day that he did bring his phone in? Why the need to quantify that it was his personal phone? What did he need his personal phone for that day when he ordinarily uses another phone? The phone is sensitive. What does bringing his personal phone in have to do with how late he responds to her text? (Red herring)

If his reason for not responding was because he brought his personal phone in, then where was he when he DID respond at 1:39 p.m.?

Anonymous said...

OK I do agree he's full of crap. I will look at his statements further.

Anonymous said...

Instead of "Bring her home" he could have said

"Release her"

or

"Let her go"

Anonymous said...

"Bring her home" is his choice of words.

Anonymous said...

Someone posted some excellent points and questions:

"His reason for not responding earlier to her 10:37 a.m. text was because "I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on my job. So I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. that day.”

If he usually does not, what was different about this day that he did bring his phone in?

Why the need to quantify that it was his personal phone?

What did he need his personal phone for that day when he ordinarily uses another phone?

The phone is sensitive.

What does bringing his personal phone in have to do with how late he responds to her text? (Red herring)

If his reason for not responding was because he brought his personal phone in, then where was he when he DID respond at 1:39 p.m.?"

lynda said...

Again, we are assuming that since her phone was found in the road (ONLY ACCORDING TO THE HUSBAND WHO FOUND IT) that she was kidnapped when she was "jogging". When in actuality, she could have had a jog and come home.

What happened to her could have happened to her once she returned home.

"The worst thing ever"

I don't think so. The worst thing would be that she was dead.

I don't even know what or where to begin with the "I know she's screaming for me"

Husband drives around all day going different places. He installs home theaters for Best Buy.

Lis said...

Her husband looks terrified and grief stricken. I wonder if this could be like the case of Sherry Arnold, the teacher who was abducted while jogging in Montana.
As a woman, it seems you always have to have the awareness there are people around who would love to kill you.

Anonymous said...

Lynda,

It says she was seen jogging.

Is that the only video of the husband talking is the "bring her home" video?

Anonymous said...

"I know she's screaming for me" is meant (by him) for law enforcement to react with "Oh, he believes she's still alive. He didn't kill her." Ha - that guy thinks he's so clever. I'll bet law enforcement is sooooo on to his shenanigans. He's like the little kid in grade school who cried a river when he got caught stealing from the commissary.

Anonymous said...

Lis, I am a woman, I dont live in fear. I figure if someone attacks me, and my time's up, oh well.

Now, if a serial killer got her, he would want the phone or earbuds...something to keep as a trophy. The killing in MA, the killer took both. The one in New York, am I correct that he left the phone but took the earbuds?

lynda said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
Lynda,

It says she was seen jogging.

Is that the only video of the husband talking is the "bring her home" video?

November 8, 2016 at 9:40 PM

______________________________

Yes..that I know of. It was a continuous interview but the news outlet released bits of the interview everyday. I'm sure there's more that that particular station has not shown yet. They appear to be doling it out in parts..I would assume to get viewership up.

Shannon Duane said...

It's not worded that way. Someone who knows him said that's really what the money is for.

Shannon Duane said...

I had my daughter in daycare when I stayed home. She seems to have jogged everyday at the same time. Maybe she ran a home business. No one has said...

Shannon Duane said...

I think he was saying he DID NOT bring it in with him so he didn't see the text until 1:30ish and then responded. It sounds like a feeble attempt at alibi building. I have a bad feeling he "surprised" her on her jog "honey, I decided to jog with you today! Surprise!"

lynda said...

Husband said,


“I received a text message from her @ 10:37 a.m. that day, asking me if I was coming home from lunch. I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on, on my job so, I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. later that day”

------
I usually don’t bring my personal phone in
(No one asked, extra information, sounds like alibi building, he's telling us what he didn't do..bring his phone in to work.

IS it alibi building?

Shannon Duane said...

I feel like it is. I read another article, though, where this brother in law said the husband had a solid alibi for the time she was seen running (i.e. 2pm...but what if it was 11am instead?), that his work car has gps and his cell records confirm he was with the car at all times. But to me, none of that is proof of anything...he could've parked a second car, left his work car and cell phone in work car, gone to "lunch" and just waited for her to show up on her remote jogging path. Yes, I feel very disturbed I came up with this theory...but something just doesn't feel right about this.

If the daycare was open till 6pm and he got home at 5:51pm, he sure went from "gosh, no one is home" to "maybe the kids are still at daycare!". But maybe her car was there and that was suspicious enough that he checked on the kids. Still, I would like to see a stronger timeline.

Trudy said...

The husband's statement - "I usually don't bring my personal phone in..." - begs the question, why did the Sherri bother to call his personal phone in the first place? Didn't she know he doesn't usually bring his personal phone in on his job?

tania cadogan said...

lynda said...

Husband said,


“I received a text message from her @ 10:37 a.m. that day, asking me if I was coming home from lunch. I usually don’t bring my personal phone in on, on my job so, I didn’t respond to that message until 1:39 p.m. later that day”

------
I usually don’t bring my personal phone in
(No one asked, extra information, sounds like alibi building, he's telling us what he didn't do..bring his phone in to work.

IS it alibi building?

November 9, 2016 at 12:22 PM


Anything is the negative is sensitive.
It also smacks of alibi building, he also answers an unasked question making it sensitive.

Anonymous Trudy said...

The husband's statement - "I usually don't bring my personal phone in..." - begs the question, why did the Sherri bother to call his personal phone in the first place? Didn't she know he doesn't usually bring his personal phone in on his job?

November 9, 2016 at 3:41 PM


Exactly.
If she knew he didn't usually take his personal phone to work, wouldn't she have called his work phone or had another of contacting him?

Carnival Barker said...


This is the first I'm reading about this case. I haven't watched him speak yet, but right off the bat, "bring her home" seems very personal to me. You "drop" your kids off at school, but you "bring" them home. You "bring" your new baby home. That sounds like very personal language to me. It sounds to me like you are "returning" to somewhere you are familiar with. Kidnappers aren't chauffeurs. "Drop her off" or "Leave her on the side of the road" sound more appropriate when you are speaking to a stranger. I don't know if there is a Statement Analysis principle to support that, but that's how it hits my ear.

Anonymous said...

Carnival Barker:

Yeh "Bring her home" is language that assumes the intended recipient/listener shares the same idea of "home". And "bring her home" is so personal and means "bring BACK home".

Yeh he could have said "Let her go" or "Release her." or "Drop her off".

He's betraying his guilt with that very phrase "Bring her home" which he says over and over.

If you want to see it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ym3ruN0ClDU

Anonymous said...

The vast majority (all?) of people posting comments under that Inside Edition video on YouTube are whole-heartedly supportive of the husband. They completely utterly are believing him, supportive of him.

Anonymous said...

Waterville police chief said his task is "to bring Ayla safely back home" during day 4 of the search.

Anonymous said...

I think in this case, they need to be looking for a serial killer. I really do.

Anonymous said...

He has a flashing neon sign over his head pointing down at him. Does anyone else see it?

Carnival Barker said...



Thank you, Anon 7:44. I just watched the Inside Edition clip, and now I am convinced that my instincts were correct. People that don't wipe their tears are a flashing red flag to me. Sorry, but no one lets their eyes well up like that without wiping ... unless they want to MAKE SURE YOU SEE HOW SAD THEY ARE!

Anonymous said...

"flashing red flag" hahaha...did anon give you some of his LSD Carnival?

Didja ever think men are trained to try to hide the fact they are crying. People who are fake crying wipe the pretend of limited tears--it draws more attention to the fact they are "crying".

Anonymous said...

Perfect example of fake crying, at beginning of video, Scott Peterson produces real tears and it's gross he needs a tissue...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11LAvopWkUQ

Anonymous said...

Casey Anthony would often "wipe" nonexistant tears, so it just depends.

Carnival Barker said...


Anon 9:27, NO tears at all when acting like there are tears is another tell ... a more obvious one.

Scott Peterson is a PERFECT example of what I'm talking about. He let his one tear drip all the way down to his mouth without wiping it away. Sorry, but NO ONE who is truly bereaved does that; they don't give a sh*t if you see them cry or not.

Anonymous said...

Carnival, true, I agree with what you said, but don't you think SCott Peterson is way more overdramatic with his "look at me crying" routine than Sherri's husband?

Carnival Barker said...


Anon 9:55, yes, Peterson's tear was more obvious and theatrical, but this one's husband is in the same vain. Watch the clip. He wants to make sure those "tears" stay where everyone can see them.

Layla said...

I also do have a question though of something I think is odd that I observed in the video...this is not a joke comment and I hope it will be addressed.

I don't like the fact that the sister-in-law is wearing something very peculiar which seems to be some kind of cold weather earmuff/headband type thing when it is obviously not cold...she is indoors and wearing a sleeveless shirt. This earmuff/headband is, in fact covering her ears, which is something else that most people would not do particularly during an interview. It also obscures part of her face.

I don't like it. It does not "feel" right to me, and I wonder if she is intentionally hiding something about her face. Specifically, defensive wounds.

Why would a person intentionally cover their ears to make hearing difficult during an interview. If that is the only way they can cover scratches they would.

I will be reviewing what the sister-in-law said to look for anything sensitive.

Layla said...

Could someone please find out what the tattoo on the sister-in-law's arm is? I freeze-framed it, and it appears to be a woman wearing a mask with rabbit ears attached. What is this image? It's very important that we find out.

Layla said...

The sister-in-law and the brother are responsible for whatever was done to her.

We need to know what the image on the sister-in-law's arm is. Why is the woman on her arm's face obscured and why is the sister-in-law's face partially obscured?

Layla said...

The sister-in law and the husband blind-folded her.



"She was an amazing light of a person". said the sister-in-law

The victim could not see light when they abducted/attacked her.

The sister-in-law is wearing something that could be used as a blindfold. Her tattoo depicts a woman with face partially obscured.

Anonymous said...

I agree the first time I heard the video of the sister and sister in law I felt something funny. The sister seems to me more stressed and troubled than the sister in law who even flashes a smile during her interview. Just for a moment. I too didn't get the head gear, but thought maybe she had been out exercising and it might have been cold out. I am going to go listen from a statement perspective this time. The two seem to be not "together" by that I mean, they probably outside of this circumstance may not be each other's favorite at family gatherings.

Layla said...

I agree, something is off with sister-in-law.

Another video showing the full interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8QBYrb3gN4


Sister-in-law: "We're emotionless."
"We're sick".

Layla said...

Sorry, sister-in-law says "I'm emotionless" and the sister's eyes fill up with tears.

Sister-in-law smiles when asked about the phone and says "It's good to have some kind of clue".

Sister-in-law refers to the Mom being "on her schedule". Did sister-on-law and hubby have the Mom "on a schedule"? The phrase denotes someone being in command of another. Parents have children on a schedule. Why does sister-in-law say that the Mom "was on her schedule"?

Layla said...

I think SIL and brother were abusing Sherri. I think Sherri was a very good Mom. As SIL says, she found it "annoying" she was such a good Mom. But I think these 2 were abusing Sherri and I think they told her she was a bad Mom, and I think that is why the kids were in daycare even though Sherri was at home, so they didn't need to be in daycare. I really think these 2 mentally abused her badly, telling her she was a bad Mom and you're not capable of taking care of these kids, they're going to daycare.

Anonymous said...

The way the SIL talks, I sense they both would put her down for being a stay at home Mom...like saying things like "You're a shitty Mom...you're worthless...you're lazy...what do you even do while you're at home?" You can tell bc the sister-in-law says of Sherri "She was always here gardening with the kids or doing projects with the kids" yet the kids were in daycare....like you can tell they didn't value her work around the house or time spent with the children and care given to the children as a stay at home Mom...it was like "what are you doing?" "ARe you doing something constructive with the kids?" I just can sense it so much that they both were like "WHAT did you do with the kids today? Did you do any projects with them? Did you build a garden with them?" "you'd better be doing somethng productive with these kids!!!!!!!" I bet those kids would put into daycare as the ultimate act of mental abuse against Sherri like you are such a shitty mother, you don't do shit with these kids, they're going to daycare!!!!

Anonymous said...

They say her dream was to be a stay at home Mom (and I bet it was) and yet the kids are in day care? This guy was doing f&cked up stuff to this lady. He was isolating her I will tell you that. Making it so her kids were not even around while she's a stay at home MOm. Then he says she called his personal phone and asked if he was coming home for lunch, yet he says he usually never brought his personal phone to work...why? Probably so she couldn't reach him, to increase the isolation. Then he brings it to work and she asks if he's coming home for lunch and he says "No". HOw do we even know she sent that text asking about lunch? I wouldn't be surprised if he kept her phone during the day. Both phones are sensitive. HIs personal phone and her phone. I am on the page that this guy is guilty of this woman's disappearance.

Anonymous said...

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/11/the_funniest_parts_of_hillarys_tragic_concession_speech.html


Is this statements analysis????

Peter Hyatt said...

Although time does not allow for correction of all here (see above), here is something to consider. Since the poster does not use an actual name, it should provide no embarrassment. It is better than "anonymous", for at least "Layla" (I like the acoustic version a lot) can be addressed and can learn:



November 9, 2016 at 10:59 PM Delete
Anonymous Layla said...
Sorry, sister-in-law says "I'm emotionless" and the sister's eyes fill up with tears.

Sister-in-law smiles when asked about the phone and says "It's good to have some kind of clue".

Sister-in-law refers to the Mom being "on her schedule". Did sister-on-law and hubby have the Mom "on a schedule"? The phrase denotes someone being in command of another. Parents have children on a schedule. Why does sister-in-law say that the Mom "was on her schedule"?

end of Layla comment.


There is no inconsistency with one saying "I am emotionless" and then crying. Consider the shock of the missing sister in law as it wears upon the subject. This is a self-defense mechanism quite similar to physical "shock" which protects the body from pain.

Then consider the relief that may have just come with tears.

There is nothing here that shows guilty knowledge by the SIL. IF she was involved, it is not in this statement.

Peter

lynda said...

Peter..The police have said husband has passed a lie detector test but I don't really know if that means anything really or not.

Husband has given new interview to PEOPLE magazine and is there are new details/changed details along with more info from him

WHY do I still have such a bad feeling? Is there ANYTHING in SA of husband that would cause this? This is really bugging me. Or could he be concealing something else and that is what I feel off about? An affair? A divorce? I am interested in what others think particularly with the passing of the poly

Husband states in People mag (http://people.com/crime/missing-sherri-papini-update-husband-keith-interview/)


“I just want her back, and I want her back safe,”

“Just bring her home,” he says to whomever is responsible. “Please bring her back. The sooner the better.”

“She is my wife, and I know everything about her,” “I know that my wife would never leave me and never in a million years leave our kids.”

“she would have to have been either snuck up on, or there would have been multiple or maybe two people, because my wife is very aware. She wouldn’t have allowed somebody to get that close to her unless it was unsuspecting”

“My gut says it is a person unknown to myself and Sherri. My gut tells me it is just low-life people.”


“I didn’t get that message because I don’t usually bring my personal phone in with me,” “I texted her back later at 1:30 p.m. and said, ‘Sorry, it is going to be a late day.’ ”

Keith says he believes his wife went jogging around 11 a.m., shortly after he didn’t return her text. “I am putting her leaving around that time,”

“That is based on the text I got, and there were some people I spoke with that were cutting down a tree, and they informed us that they saw my wife running. ”



During his search of the house, Keith says he found a partially wrapped present addressed to him from his wife and two kids.
“She must have been wrapping her presents,” “It is like an American flag pillow that she more than likely she made it. It wasn’t here when I left, so I know that she must have been working on that.”

‘I Knew Something Horrible Had Happened’

Keith says he texted his wife again, and when she didn’t respond he used the Find my iPhone application and located his her cell phone and earbuds about one mile from their home, near the intersection of Old Oregon Trail and Sunrise Drive. The earbuds reportedly had strands of Sherri’s hair on them.

“And once when I saw the phone, it only confirmed what I already felt that I knew somebody grabbed her,” he says. ” I knew something horrible had happened, and I immediately called 911.”

Speaking of the days before the disappearance
_____________________

“There wasn’t any weird texts phone calls or emails,” “There is not like a suspicious thing I thought of or seen that I could point in that direction.

“It is nothing like that. It is just like she vanished.”

Anonymous said...

Thank you Peter...important point you are clarifying...my mistake...I was attempting to process too much at once as far as what you were pointing out combined with me reflecting on what had been discussed here last night while trying to also take inventory of what I had written last night..after I replied to you I then I began reflecting on the case incorporating what you had posted this AM, and actually realized you had only focused on the SIL on your comment.
I am actually more interested than ever in this case due to your clarification and I look forward to reading more here about the case.

Anonymous said...

Lynda, thank you for sharing these quotes. What specifically do you find suspicious in his language?

That is interesting about the half-wrapped present.

This case is a good exercise for me in adhering strictly to linguistic indicators as there was a jogger killed in my state at the end of the summer during the day in a rural area, and police have not been able to identify any suspects. The killer has been profiled as being a man who is a serial killer who will kill again. While I find it VERY unlikely Sherri was harmed by this specific killer, bc of the great distance CA is from my state, I realize that when looking at the case through the lense of SA, I have to keep my initial instinct to view Sherri's disappearance as being the work of a serial killer at bay.

Anonymous said...

Could he possibly have half-unwrapped the gift out of curiosity just to see what it was, bc I dont think people usually label half-wrapped presents.

That is also an unusual group present...one pillow addressed to 3 people?

lynda said...

Anonymous said...
Lynda, thank you for sharing these quotes. What specifically do you find suspicious in his language?
________________

In this last interview, and they may mean nothing as I am a novice at best at SA, that is why I'm interested in what others who have a better grasp of the principles think.

“I just want her back, and I want her back safe,” -
***
Does he not want her back if she's not "safe"


“She is my wife, and I know everything about her,” “I know that my wife would never leave me and never in a million years leave our kids.”
***

This feels like a need to persuade to me. He knows everything about her, no he doesn't. "Never in a million years"...he places himself (me) before the (kids) as who she would never leave. Also, "our" in relation to kids instead of "my" enters here as he has done before. Peter says that we hear that when divorce or trouble in the marriage is present.

“I am putting her leaving around that time,”
*******
Is he the only one putting her leaving at the time? He does not say "we" or "LE". He alone, feels she left at that time. Why is he the only one that believes so?

“My gut says it is a person unknown to myself and Sherri. My gut tells me it is just low-life people.”
*********
Again, a need to persuade. His gut says it is low-lifes. Why? Why would anyone eliminate a large percent of population who could have possibly taken her and just say "low-life"

“she would have to have been either snuck up on, or there would have been multiple or maybe two people, because my wife is very aware. She wouldn’t have allowed somebody to get that close to her unless it was unsuspecting”
*****
This is a whole story. He's pretty committed in trying to relay the message that somebody "unknown" took her, now there are multiple "unknown" people involved. This is one of those statements that just leave a bad taste in my mouth..."snuck" "two people" "unsuspecting" I don't like his language and I'm not sure why.

"I know she's screaming for me but I don't know where she is."
________________
This statement actually makes me wince for whatever reason. I suppose it's the visual that it conjures up. Who would say something like this?

















Anonymous said...

Is it possible this is a hoax and they're both in on it?

lynda said...

anon @ 1:51

I would think not.

Queen said...

Why did the husband touch the phone if he felt she was kidnap. Wouldn't that be concider evidence for the police! He posably ruined finger print evidence.

Carnival Barker said...


@ Peter,

Is there any veracity to my theory about his use of the term "BRING her home"? "Bring" to me sounds like he's talking to someone he knows (possibly himself.) I remember when Laci Peterson's mother was making a plea to her kidnapper she said, "Let her go." That sounds appropriate.

Also, his statement that when he found her phone he knew that she had been "taken or abducted." Why draw a distinction?

Shannon Duane said...

I agree..."bring" is a weird word to use. You "bring" gifts. You "bring" food to share. But you wouldn't "bring" a nasty note, for example. You'd leave one. Bring just sounds like a weak word.

And although I posted on a newer thread today, my. Analysis is almost identical to lynda's, and I think she has a good grasp of basic SA, so I'm happy to be on the same page as her.

Anonymous said...

Husband: "It's hard waiting you know, you are waiting for a phone call, you're waiting for something to tell us this is the directions, or this is the house, or this is the car and that is very difficult right now."

Davey Blackburn complained about "waiting" after his wife had been shot - I think she lasted a day or so, if I recall. He referred to it as "a waiting game".

Wasnt me said...

i dont even think it was her jogging that day..I think it was someone in a blonde wig and a pink sweat suit that appeared to be her...I think he killed her in the house and then who knows a day 2 days later after he had cleaned everything up and come up with a plan to hide it.I think she is hidden in the house under some concrete or out on the property .It should be searched for everything like new walk way ,flower beds,driveway,walls,grass,etc..even under new shed or whatever also house she be searched with black light for blood..And house should be searched for new cement cut carpet ,look under beds,under oven,fridge,dryer,washer closets basement and look at walls for any new siding etc..I am having heart problems so my typing isnt that good ..sorry

Anonymous said...

http://imgleak.com/media/1379963701906292653_1272145215

Wasnt me said...

I hope you can see it

Wasnt me said...

that photo was marked 4 days ago

Anonymous said...

I would never want to say anything bad, given the situation. And, the fact that I have not heard, or read his verbatim statement, and this could all be just poor reporting....but, the first thing my husband is going to do if I am not in the house, when he comes home, is text me....and ask...where are you? And, this would not be immediate. If i dont answer, he would call.. If my car is home, he would assume I am at neighbors, or out walking..with a friend...whatever. As I would with him. With this situation...why did he not first call her, text her, call family, call friends before locating her phone on an app. That is just strange to me.

Anonymous said...

And, I agree, why would the day care provider not call him? And, a normal reaction if the kids were not picked up would be to call or text your spouse to see what was going on...maybe she had been with a friend or family member and was running behind. I do not know. It just all sounds like abnormal reactions to a common situation...spouse not home, running late, etc. And, once I realized the situation was no longer common, I would have immediately called the police.

Karen T said...

Shasta County Sheriff's office has cleared the husband. He passed the poly. He spent all day being interviewed. His alibi's check out. But, check this little piece of weirdness out:

http://www.krcrtv.com/news/local/shasta/anonymous-source-creates-sherri-papini-website-offers-reward/168229851

My first thought was that hubby did it. Now I don't know. Also, I used to live in Shasta County & I have to say that I do not have a lot of confidence in SCSO. In Aug 1998, a 16 yr old girl went missing from Oregon Trail while out jogging.. She looks very similar to Sheri. Her case went cold right away & she has never been located.

Anonymous said...

this is bizarre. from 2003 in her maiden name (she would have been 21?)

https://web.archive.org/web/20071030034941/http://www.skinheadz.com/docs/instruct/2003/060101.html

goldengirl said...

My comment is not meant to offend anyone; I want to bring something new to the table, so I'm leaving this here.

Like many of you, I find it a bit odd and "convenient" that her husband found her phone. A comment I read somewhere online earlier got my imagination going. I know everyone called her SuperMom. What a lot of pressure to put on someone. With that being said, even though Sherri is the image of a happy mom/wife, and looks squeaky clean, we can't judge a book by it's cover. Here is a theory:

She was having an affair. Having the kids in daycare full-time made this easy. The reason she would text her husband to ask if he was coming home for lunch was really to make sure that he wouldn't be coming home, only to find her gone. At some point, her husband became suspicious, and started using his lunch hour to spy or check up on her. One day, he lied via text and told her he wouldn't be coming home for lunch. He goes home for lunch, and perhaps she isn't there. This leads to him using his next lunch hour (on a different day, of course) to arrange to follow her so he can confirm where she goes and whether she's really having an affair. He confirms that she is having an affair. He doesn't let her know that he knows anything and tries his best to act normal. Meanwhile, he plots to have her kidnapped and killed.

And here we are. So it would be a matter of the kidnapper/hitman breaking down and coming forward to solve this case, or of course, her lover.


Willow said...

I would like to clear up a few points.

The kids were in preschool/daycare two days per week, for part of the day. No reason for this has been given in the media. Her family has confirmed this schedule.

KP texted Sherri when he found an empty house, then called the daycare. When he found that Sherri had not picked up the kids, he tracked her phone.

KP works for Best Buy, installing sound systems. It is company policy that employees cannot take their personal phones into a customer's house. His personal phone is left in his vehicle during his house calls. He can check it and reply to texts in between calls.

Anonymous said...

I thought I was the only one that felt his husbands tv interview was fishy. The first time I watched it, it gave me an ingenuine feeling, something didn't seem "real". Is it true that he never called her phone or texted her before tracking it down? Who calls 911 BEFORE making a phone call to the loved one missing?

Has anyone thought that he could have texted "himself" from HER phone asking if he would be home for lunch? Because...why would she even send that message, if he typically doesnt have his phone at work? I wonder if thier texting records with each other would indicate it was typical for her to text that or not?

I don't necessarily buy the lie detector test results...

DE

Anonymous said...

Sherri Papini found ALIVE (on Thanksgiving Day no less !)

Live press conference at 2pm PST on KRCR news channel and Facebook page, from what I understand. News articles on web say she is at an undisclosed hospital and that her husband Keith is with her.

Anonymous said...

Thanksgiving Miracle?
Found Alive!
Awaiting hospital "clearance"

LisaB said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Me2l said...

Wow. This was the ONLY voice of reason here......obviously, as events have now unfolded.

I did not stay with this case, but now, the entire thing has caught my interest. After the fact! Lol

Anonymous said...

I think hes a sociopath/narcissist and he's guilty. I stumbled upon this case today and immediately thought it was him. All the red flags I've seen and people here have pointed out are logical and fit the pattern of a "narco-path" and his/her victims.

If so, then...
He has total control over everything in her life and she may have wanted out. Those people track their victims with keyloggers on their phones/computers, GPS, and record conversations. He would always know her whereabouts. She's might've wanted to be a stay at home mom, but he used that to ensure her financial dependence on him, making it hard to leave him. They do isolate their spouses, as someone mentioned he may have done. He has been abusing her mentally, emotionally, verbally, sexually, and financially. They expect perfection and to appear as the perfect family.

If you try to leave one, he will destroy you in some way. I think he beat some "sense" into her and left her for dead as punishment or revenge. So if she dies, technically he hasn't killed her, and she was of no use to him anymore anyway. If she lives, she will never disobey him or try to leave him again. He may have warned her that if she's found alive to say someone else did it or he'd kill her for real or kill the kids. Narcopaths threaten suicide, murder, taking the kids, all the money, etc, to control the victim.

They are famous for the silent treatment, which could explain his delay in responding to her text. Or maybe he went home, (interrupted her gift wrapping?), fought, then disposed of her during that time, THEN texted his reply. Or maybe he was working.

Hard to say about seeing her jogging. The timing of his texting is a bit coincidental. Unless his sister wore a wig (how tall is she?). I, too, doubted the sisters innocence due to her statements but Im focusing on him for now. But she couldve helped do strategic texting, drove him around, dumped the body, etc., while he's working.

Mind you, narcopaths start slandering their spouses very early on. Did you see the story about her possible anti Hispanic rant online in 2005? Maybe its true, but a narcopath would plant such a story way in advance. They're always 50 steps ahead. And now she's saying 2 hispanic women took her? Maybe. But still...

Anyway, so they turn people against the victim by lying to each about the other, causing resentment. Their m.o.is that of a 6 yr old. The spouse/victims have no idea. Maybe he did so with his wife and sister.

Then they use triangulation once theyve brainwashed (or frightened) others into doing their bidding (bullying and spying on the victim, etc.). The minion becomes a mini-me w/o knowing it. So I wouldn't be surprised if his sister helped.

His smile in his photos arent genuine and in a couple of them he looks, I don't know...devious? Arrogant? A canary-eating cat? SOMETHING. I haven't watched his videos yet.

If you stare long enough w/o blinking your eyes will water. You can use a substance on your finger to trigger tears. Actors use it. And I know a narc who cries on cue.

The gift wrapping...it sounds made up. A narcopath would want to prove how lovable he is by saying this kind of thing. They know how to word things w/o being obvious to make people assume what they want. Just like how everyone runs to greet him at the door. Because who would be excited to see a monster right?

Actually, he probably makes them do that.

They wont find any Hispanic women and he won't be caught.

Anonymous said...

He only blinks 2 or 3 times. He's getting his eyes to water by minimizing his blinking. It's probably also why the tears never spill onto his face. No one with real emotion cries like that.

Anonymous said...

I would have suspected the husband or someone else before a possible multistate serial killer scenario. I know serials deviate sometimes, but it just doesn't seem like the best time/location/victim for that. I do not know why I feel that way.

And now, how likely is it that there are 2 Hispanic female s.k.'s hopping from state to state looking for joggers?

At one point Keith indicated she would have been aware someone was nearby. But he must have known she was wearing earbuds while running and couldn't hear. Lame reasoning.

Anonymous said...

Notice the look on the SILs face when she looks right at the camera and says "its terrible" and continues staring into the camera with the same look. Like she was holding for audience laughter. Its like watching a Chevy Chase deadpan humour type of delivery.

She laughs after she says "we're sick..." (I never doubted it for second honey. You AND your brother). Its an odd reaction. But if they delight in torturing Sherri, its not odd at all.

Then with that deadpan delivery that reeks of sarcasm she looks away and says "Yeah. She's an incredible human being."

I do believe her - that she is "emotional-less". Because she is apathetic. She isnt consoling and has no sympathy for anyone. She just watches the other woman talks, detached.

She cant be bothered to feign concern (two bad actors in one family). She wants us to think shes NUMB from fear or disbelief. But she didn't say numb. She said emotional-less. Maybe she simply doesnt like Sherri or shes jealous, but somethings very fishy.

If you turn the volume down and watch, youd never guess she was speaking of a missing person. She jokes Sherri was "annoying" as being a supermom. Even in jest, its inappropriate, and I think she is annoyed. She said Sherri "wouldn't do anything to disrupt her children's routine" and "they're on a very tight schedule". She makes Sherri look rigid, less than loving, but had to change her tune when Sherri's sister began to speak highly of her as a mom.

While the sister talks about her being bubbly, notice the subtle expression on the SILs face: "Dupers delight". Like she knows something juicy that no one else does.

When she said, "Just bring Sherri home" I thought: in a body bag, right?

Anonymous said...

Yeah if Sherri was on a tight schedule it was probably cuz Keith demanded it.

Anonymous said...

This is highly likely if Sherri was under the control of a highly abusive person.

Anonymous said...

In regards to why he didn't call HER... my personal opinion is he was suspicious and trying to catch her at something. That doesn't mean he was involved, but it could be indicative of pre-existing issues in the marriage.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

A lot of people supported Hitler too.

Anonymous said...

He ain't hiding it. That's the point. He hardly blinks. Try it. Stare and don't blink and your eyes will water. Liars have different variations of the same manip tactic.

Anonymous said...

I started reading the article on ABCnews.com but got bored quickly and couldn't finish. He says:

"So please have a heart and understand why we have asked for our privacy."

This comes from a guy who has spoken in annoying detail to most major media outlets. Read: don't ask my wife. Listen only to me.

And did she even want all those things revealed? Granted, most of it WAS about HIS reactions.

Anonymous said...

I forgot where I read it but he told his son "I found Mommy". He couldn't even control his ego enough to at least use "we" to give someone else partial credit. Geez, he was too busy with interviews to help look for her.

I hate to sound like a broken record, but everyone needs to be extremely knowledgeable about narcissists and socios and how they operate. So you don't end up like Sherri.

They DO tell blatant lies that are obviously false. I've heard it, and I've read about it too. Some stand by the lie if questioned, no matter how ludicrous. Others say you misunderstood, you heard it wrong, or YOU are lying.

They know if they maintain absolute confidence, there are always one or two who WILL question their own logic and knowledge, and believe them anyway. It has been working for the Progressives for many years.

Hippie Gypsy said...

But if you assumed your wife had it, you'd call it first