Thursday, December 1, 2016

Understanding Training Opportunities



The analysis of a McCann interview generated much interest in training.  Here are some things to consider:

                  There is no substitute for formal training. 

 As iron sharpens iron, so it is that new student analysts are always pleasantly surprised what team training holds.  Between 6 and 12 professionals work together for a common goal.  They are not competing with one another; they are working together, supporting each other, while inputing:

knowledge
experience 
objectivity
subjectivity
creativity --
inquisitive questioning 
self restraint 

Some of these traits,  are often more pronounced in female analysts than males, requiring us to be:

natural and balanced.  This is especially necessary in Anonymous Author Identification as well as psycho-linguistic profiling.  

Those given to the deception propaganda known as 'political correctness' cannot do this work and maintain illogic or absurdity as a narrative. It is an assault on critical thinking by elevating emotion above reason.  In analysis, we seek truth, not something that will help elect anyone.    

Analysts often find a 'disassociation" that takes place over time, as focus upon truth versus deception trumps opinion.  The more this is done (frequency) over the passage of time, the more focus continues with all else becoming 'shadows' of disinterest or afterthought.  

The training is "guided training" meaning a facilitator is there to correct and challenge.  The end result comes from intense scrutiny, observation and the free exchange of ideas; all based upon principle.  They work live cases in which the outcome will have significance.  This is a driving passion for them and to do this work, they must have a strong sense of humility.  

Humility allows for correction.  
Filming ABC's "20/20" October 2016 

Analysis work also brings personalities to the surface, including the dangerous unresolved issues in our lives.  We all face trauma and we all have issues in life.   Suspicious people, perhaps so by trauma, do very poorly in this work unless (or until) they confront the root cause, which some have successfully done.  

Some have gone to a certain point, but no further, for fear of being wrong, rather than embracing and celebrating correction.  

As we work through a statement, we are continually and unashamedly "wrong" with most corrections coming directly from the statement, itself.  We tether ourselves to principle and, in our first "go round" of analysis, refuse to speculate.  Once our conclusion is finished, we go for our level of analysis, as we allow the statement to reveal:

The author's background
The author's experiences in life
The author's priority for writing the statement 
The author's personality type or dominant traits.  

When these four elements are known, threat assessment accuracy follows.  

When statement analysis concludes with a strong description of a personality type,  and the court's psychological evaluation later affirms the statement analysis, it is something special.  

When a police officer is promoted from patrol due to his knowledge in Statement Analysis, the reward is shared by all the analysts.  

When a conviction, or, as is more frequent, a confession (admission) is obtained, and justice is procured, there is an emotional satisfaction that can last for years. 

When the analysis of a statement is opposed to the polygraph result and the subject confesses, the analysts who 'stayed the course' did so only because the statement 'demanded' it.  

When the FBI thwarts a terrorist attack, media yawns, but those who worked diligently to penetrate into the minds of the Islamic killers, have great reason to rejoice; so deeply, that it makes all the sacrifices worth while.  


So it is when justice is obtained for victims silenced by murderers for those who began the case "knowing" from the words:





Who did it
When he did it
How he did it
Why he did it

Consider the confidence one has going into an investigation already knowing these details.  

Certification

Certification value is found in the work that we do.  

It takes dedication, consistency , hard work and it takes time, but one of the most exciting aspects of training comes through the support that is part of every package:  12 months. 

What does this mean?

It means that ever step of the journey is guided and proofed.  This begins by reducing error but eventually expands into content analysis.  

In the first month of training, should an investigator have a statement, he or she now has the support of professionals who will make sure no errant report is submitted.  

Tuition and Seminar Costs are here

For those who love to work 'fast', the mantra is to slow down.  
For those who are willing to embrace repetition, success will follow.  

Online Live Monthly Training  

The monthly training is offered to those enrolled in training, and a 25% discount is given for a year's subscription.  Should a busy schedule mean missing a session, the analyst can add a month on, or can attend another session.  This is where all the learning done comes together for testing, proving, correcting, and finally, leading to professional success.  Different time zones are recognized and when you enroll in a training, you may expect the general pattern to be that training is held on the same day for you each month, to help planning. 

This training is confidential.  The results belong to the police department that requested the analysis.  They are never published, even after adjudication.  The reward for the successful work is deep and it is private.  

For individuals who are self-motivated, taking the course at home allows for the vital repeated listening of lectures, whereas the seminars allow for Q &A, as correction during the training. 

The best way to reverse the 'dulled listening' is through MP3s of the lecture being repeated. This will help lead to "discourse analysis" or spotting signals of deception in live conversation.  

 "Wise as a Serpent; Gentle as a Dove" reviews some specific cases using analysis.  

Detecting deception is useful for so many professions, far beyond law enforcement and human resources.  

Beginning with a systematic study and immediate application strengthens one's resume and value and gives new insight into the world around us.  Judging by the assault on critical thinking in colleges, this downward trend should continue for many years.  

Regrettably, deception has become more common place in our culture than it has in centuries.  Businesses' insurance costs are extreme as exploitation via fraudulent claims are seen 'favorably' in courts as "victim status" is granted to thieves.  

Today, the overwhelming majority of Americans and Europeans state that main stream or corporate media is untrustworthy.  Journalists training in Statement Analysis can serve our dire need for truth in reporting. 

Therapists, psychologists, social workers and other professionals within the social services realm may receive CEU's for their licensing renewal requirements, from the University of Maine, while implementing their new and growing skills in their work.  








76 comments:

Peter Hyatt said...

"Where is the Donald Trump analysis?" questions have the inherent insult of asserting bias.

These comments are not only deleted, but are put in the SPAM filter so that eventually, the IP address will be blocked from commenting on the blog.

There is no reason, other than to agitate, for one to post such. Given the nature of the bias assertion, there is no reason to want to read the work here.

Why would an intelligent person wish to read analysis from someone so 'obviously biased'?

Hence, the Alinsky playbook of agitation.

Please do not respond to such posts. If one cannot safely say that a human is a male or a female, the one has no use for Statement Analysis. Like the McCann case where one's only objection was "stop hating!", the elevation of emotion over thinking has no place here.

This is, to borrow their own phrase, a "safe space" for truth.

When reason is declared to be
"racist" and "hateful" and "phobic", there is no dialog.

It is hypocritical (and illogical) to declare an analyst to be a "racist" and then want to 'join his blog' via dialog, unless the one has either had his or her eyes opened to truth, or they wish to agitate.

Some do this with passive-eggressive commenting that two of the mods love to spot and comment on, but even that must be deleted.

In summation, this is a place for truth. It is a place where one can come and read and learn and engage in constructive comments by like minded people.

The agitators need to go to Huffpost, where you may learn that "Beyonce should be believed because she is a woman" or
that Bruce Jenner is "Woman of the Year" or join with Ohio State University to increase the number of Islamists to the college.

Those and 98% of media are 'safe spaces' for the absurd and illogical.

It is the moral narcissism that brought them down this rabbit hole and fixing it is not within the scope of this blog. I want this blog to be something truth seekers can enjoy and learn from and not be assaulted with the usual illogical labeling that seeks to silence them.

They've had enough of that for 8 years now.

They don't need to read that Black Lives Matters condemns the heroic cop who shot dead the Islamist. They don't need to read that 21 year old males need to pet kittens and have therapy because an election did not turn out the way they hoped for. They don't want to have their identity labeled with a lengthy abbreviation for sex. They've had enough. They come here for truth and critical thinking.

Please don't reply to the posts as your own post may thus be deleted.

Thank you,

Peter

Hey Jude said...

I think Keith Papini's language is unexpectedly passive for what he is describing - it is strange.

The quotes have been edited/tidied up, but here as found on people.com webpages:


“She was bound, she had a chain around her waist, that is correct, she had a bag over her head, that is correct,” Keith told ABC News’ Matt Gutman.

“Her left hand was in the vehicle chained to something, she was chained anytime she was in a vehicle. They opened the door, she doesn’t know because she had a bag over her head, they cut something to free her restraint that was holding her into the vehicle and then, kind of, pushed her out of the vehicle,” Keith continued to detail of what his wife told him.

---

“My first sight was my wife in a hospital bed. Her face covered in bruises ranging from yellow to black because of her repeated beatings,” he said. “The bridge of her nose broken. She has been branded and I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers.”

---

The full interview is scheduled to air on Friday, Dec. 2. ABC 20/20



Katrina said...

"She has been branded and I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers."

First off, It sounds like Keith is the one who branded her and could feel the "rise of her scabs under his fingers". in other words, he felt the sensation of the branding iron causing the inflammation. "Feeling the rise of her scabs"....So he was present with her as the wound scabbed over? As the "scabs rose"....he seems strangely knowledgeable about the healing process of a brand burn. Perhaps he applied antibiotic with his fingers and also dressed the wound during her kidnapping. Is that when he felt the scabs beneath his fingers? Or did the hospital invite him to put his disgusting dirty fingers on a wound VERY PRONE TO INFECTION?! If there was no antibiotic applied during her kidnapping, she would have had a NASTY INFECTION.

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

"I felt the rise of her ______ under my fingers."

I wonder what kind of "literature" he reads.

Just sayin'

Anonymous said...


"She has been branded and I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers."

That choice of words is not normal.

Anonymous said...

Question: How are you doing after your bike accident?

Answer: I'm okay, but you should feel the rise of my scabs.

Anonymous said...

He says he felt "overwhelming nausea" and "revulsion" and that her appearance was "graphic and gruesome", and called it a "grotesque tragedy".

Anonymous said...

She and her children need to be separated from him, and put in a safe place away from him. It is mind-boggling that they put her and the 2 little kids back with him.

Hey Jude said...

'And again just another sign of how my wife is, she’s so wonderful. She’s saying, "Well maybe people aren’t stopping because I have a chain that looks like I broke out of prison" so she tried to tuck in her chain under her clothes.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3988194/Husband-kidnapped-California-mom-Sherri-Papini-describes-harrowing-moment-released-captors-dumped-roadside.html#ixzz4Rdr8qdNj


'Her chain' - that seems all wrong to me. He is owning it for her - I'd expect him to have said 'the chain'.

----

Also, the other family members' reactions to Sheri being found alive was somehow lacking - if they actually even mentioned her by name. Seemed to be more about being thankful that the family were all together again rather than more specifically being glad for and about Sheri. I did not save the quotes, but they were interesting.

Anonymous said...

I suspect that he hired people to kidnap and torture his wife. I hope and pray Law Enforcement will figure this out. He did it for publicity, thrill, and money.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
He says he felt "overwhelming nausea" and "revulsion" and that her appearance was "graphic and gruesome", and called it a "grotesque tragedy".

December 1, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Okay it's good we know he really really really really REALLY REALLY REALLY isn't turned on by her the way she is now.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Papini, how did you feel when you finally saw your beloved missing wife?

"overwhelming nausea" and "revulsion"

Hey Jude said...

'And again just another sign of how my wife is, she’s so wonderful. She’s saying, "Well maybe people aren’t stopping because I have a chain that looks like I broke out of prison" so she tried to tuck in her chain under her clothes.'

To whom is/was she saying that - he makes it sound as if she was saying it to him while she was alone at the roadside. She might have said she told him she had thought that, but he says she is saying it at the time when she tried to tuck in 'her chain' under her clothes.

A dog might have a chain or leash and it might be called his or hers - would a husband of a kidnap victim be likely to regard a chain placed on his wife as 'her' chain? I don't think so.

Anonymous said...

I dont think he hired anyone to kidnap her....he prob had her chained in the woods or some shack in the woods.

Anonymous said...

Keith Pappini, Did you cut off her hair so you could create a wig to wear so you could turn into your mother?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone realize how bizarre it is that we've heard ZERO about her experience?? People here are having to make up stuff because it's such an information vacuum.

Anonymous said...

Keith Pappini, did you break her nose because you coveted her nose, you wanted a cute nose like she had? Keith is that why you did it?

Anonymous said...

Keith did you think she looked intimidating like an escaped jail felon all 87 pounds of her and "her chain"? Keith, tell us about your mother. I think thats where the problem lies.

Anonymous said...

Yes I do think it is bizarre. I also think it is bizarre he said revulsed....grotesque tragedy. "Grotesque tragedy"....he has read that phrase somewhere.

Anonymous said...

The kidnappers didnt care if she saw their faces? They only put a bag over her head everytime she was in a vehicle? You would think the kidnappers would also make sure she didnt see their faces. They were only concerned about her not knowing anything about the roads they were travelling? Something doesnt add up there. Particularly since it seems she didnt have access to a phone to call someone and say "Hey I think theyre holding me near the Quickie Mart."

John mcgowan said...

Snipped:

"The interviews were very intense, for both the investigators and for Sherri, with her having to relive this traumatic event," Bosenko said, of the interviews with detectives, which took place over the last two days. "She was cooperative and courageous during the interviews."


I don't see any red flags in SA terms (principles) in his statement. I do wonder why though, LE felt the need to say she was cooperative. When someone says someone was cooperative it suggest's they were either asked was she cooperative,? or they themselves, (LE) may have had doubts in their (victims) cooperation leading up to the interview.

John mcgowan said...

^^If the latter is the case, Why?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/california-mom-held-weeks-recounts-ordeal-cops-n690341

Hey Jude said...

Well, he maybe had anticipated she would be too traumatised and fearful of threats made by her captors to be able to say what she knows or might know - or that she might even be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Scarlett said...

I love this blog, as I always leave it with more knowledge than I went in.
I watched the JonBenet documentary with my youngest son yesterday. When the 911 call was shown, "We have a kidnapping"

He understood what I meant.

John mcgowan said...

Hey Jude said...

Well, he maybe had anticipated she would be too traumatised and fearful of threats made by her captors to be able to say what she knows or might know - or that she might even be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Hi

If she was traumatised to the degree were she wasn't fit to be interviewed. Would they not say that she was unable or not well enough to be interviewed, at present. I guess we would have to find out his subjective internal dictionary definition of "cooperative".

Hey Jude said...

Hi, John,

Yes, that was the case initially, so she must have recovered sufficiently to be interviewed, or appeared to be recovered enough - that would have been evaluated. Even so, that type of trauma would have inestimable effects, IMO, so she still might not be willing or able to disclose all that happened, or be able to give all her thoughts or any suspicions - maybe he doubts that she has been as co-operative now as she might be able to be later, yet has been co-operative in as much as she is able.

Yes, what does he mean by 'co-operative'? It does sound like something said of a suspect, so it is an unfortunate choice of wording if she is entirely a victim.

Anonymous said...

I think it was the first TV interview after she went missing where he said "I know she's screaming for me now."

Hey Jude said...

It was a strange thing to say, including the 'now' - he might be worried someone had already heard her screaming his name.

--

Well, if I was kidnapped and had been driven a distance from anywhere it would be likely my husband could hear me, I would not be screaming his name, or for him in particular, I would be more shouting for anyone's help if I could - but maybe not, in case the captor/s were still nearby. I doubt I would scream, I would be trying to free myself, and keeping calm so as to not antagonise or attract the attention of the kidnapper.

If I was being tortured, however, I would almost certainly scream - one wouldn't have any control over that. If I was being tortured by someone whose name I knew, I would probably plead for him to stop, and use his name, though maybe not - that's only how I imagine myself reacting.



---

i wonder if he will say in the full interview that she has said she was screaming his name. It seems an unlikely thing for her to do, unless maybe she is entirely dependent upon him? Even if she is, it is still a strange expectation on his part - if she didn't know where she was, she couldn't expect for him to know or to hear her - yet he 'knows' she is screaming for him - so does she know he is responsible, to be screaming specifically for him, in his mind - is that leakage?

Anonymous said...

"I know she's screaming for me now." almost sounds like a statement from a man who has been feeling neglected or ignored by his wife. Or maybe even betrayed.

Anonymous said...

There's no doubt in my mind she was pointedly asked whether or not she wanted to be reunited with her husband, whether or not she felt safe with him.

Hey Jude said...

It's as though he has satisfaction in the thought, or rather knowledge, as he says he knows, that she is screaming - for him. It's very strange - he should be besides himself with worry, More understandable would be, "What's happened to her - what if she is being hurt?" - I think it would be more likely that a genuinely distressed husband would not want to articulate the thought of his wife screaming, even if he had it. It's not even just a thought to him - he says he knows. We should believe what someone tells us, unless they convince us otherwise.

The full interview will be interesting.

Anonymous said...

Tonight on 20/20, I think! Can't wait!

Anonymous said...

1) He knows.
2) She is screaming.
3) For him.
4) Now.

Anonymous said...

Sweden burning: http://www.barenakedislam.com/2016/12/02/sweden-burning-again/

John mcgowan said...

Abduction mystery of Sherri Papini grows as clue too neatly placed - what's not adding up? It certainly looks like Sherri Papini has been through the horror of a 3-week abduction, but is there something a bit odd about this story?

http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2016/12/abduction-mystery-of-sherri-papini-grows-as-clue-too-neatly-placed-what-s-not-adding-up-001300093.html

Katrina said...

How much did she weigh before captivity? She appears to be fairly tall, so is it a fair estimate to say she weighed AT LEAST 120 lbs.? Possibly more. 125 or 130 lbs? After 3 weeks she loses at least 33 lbs if we assume she weighed only 120 (which she looks to be quite tall...5 foot 9 inches? so this is a low estimate) How could she have lost that much weight that quickly unless she was not being fed AT ALL? Or so minimally? One piece of bread per day? This kind of behavior towards a captive by a kidnapper is extreme. There is usually an instinct to give the hostage ONE MEAL A DAY AT LEAST IF ONLY TO KEEP THEM ALIVE. She would not have lost at least 33 lbs in 3 weeks if she was given ONE meal a day. Just think: She was losing 10 lbs per week. If she had been held for another week or two, she would be dead. And then strangely, she is released the morning of Thanksgiving--the day of feasting. That seems awfully "generous" that her captors who cared not enough to feed her ANYTHING thought ah well we'll let you go have a nice Thanksgiving meal. What was behind this seemingly out of character generosity surrounding food?!

Katrina said...

Also, should we consider that a 33 lb weight loss (at minimum) may not have happened that rapidly (within only 3 weeks)??? In my opinion, this extremely rapid weight loss suggests she may have been being withheld food over a much greater period of time...in other words, it would have begun PRIOR to the kidnapping.

Katrina said...

I think we need to consider, due to her rapid, pathetic, near death weight loss and the release on Thanksgiving....these "captors" sadism was particularly focused on withholding food/starvation...perhaps evdn the "timing" of her abduction...3 weeks before Thanksgiving when people have begun planning for the feast....holds significance. Why would strange women in a van be so sadistic to someone regarding food intake??? I think it smacks of a cruel husband doing this to her!!!

John mcgowan said...

LE are not happy with the husband blabbering his mouth off all over Tv and the internet. He may compromised the investigation

Katrina said...

Symbolically, it seems to say "alright, you wanna stuff your face on Thanksgiving and put on weight, alright how about you starve for 3 weeks beforehand? THEN YOU CAN EAT ALL THE STUFFING AND PIE YOU WANT! ENJOY YOUR MEAL!

John mcgowan said...

The Bizarre Case of Sherri Papini

Pat Brown Criminal Profiler

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/the-bizarre-case-of-sherri-papini.html

Anonymous said...

Very interesting article posted at 1:04 above.

I hadn't heard 'till reading this (if true) she is saying she "can't remember" most of her experience while kidnapped.

I have been feeling like I did many months ago, with the AB/DB case - I felt soooo passionately that DB had hired his wife killed and/or had guilty knowledge/involvement, I was soooooo sure of it, and then nothing ever came of it!

I've got that same feeling now again, but this time, as "sure" as I am the husband is abundantly deceptive, this time I'm ready for nothing to come of it, as disappointing as that is.

Why/when should it be disappointing? ONLY if the truth is lost, and only if the actual guilty party isn't discovered.

Of course I want the truth - I would never ever wish for my "desired outcome" if that outcome wasn't the truth.

Anonymous said...

Is the FBI involved in the Sherri Papini case?? Are regular people THAT GOOD at deceiving law enforcement? As citizens of the U.S. do we need to worry that LE might PURPOSELY NOT seek justice, in some cases?

Anonymous said...

Katrina: She was 100 pounds before "kidnapping" and about 10 pounds down at end of the 3 weeks. I'm not minimizing, but want you to know the stats.

Katrina said...

How tall is she? She looks tall. 100 lbs?

Katrina said...

I almost want to say its a hoax but noone would let someone do that stuff to them.

Also Her blog entry seems forged. She talks about beating someone up and someone beating her up, and then wrote (paraphrased)" I learned then girls are too fragile to fight--they break too easily." Does that not sound like something a man would say, the perspective, the way it is worded?

Katrina said...

The perspective seems almost like coming from an alien/terminator/robot from another planet rather than a human!? "I learned then girls are too fragile to fight...they break too easily".
Like she is a robotic fighting machine from another planet. And she weighs 100 lbs?! It just seems ludicrous!
Am I wrong to think this?!

Katrina said...

Also, it seems odd how she supposedly goes nuts beating up another teenage girl in defense of HER FATHER bc the girl allegedly through a candy wrapper at him. And supposedly the Dad just sits back and lets his daughter be his defender and fight people. This seems so unusual.

Any chance that entry was written by her father?
It would seem more a middle-aged man's perspective to say "I realized then girls are too fragile to fight--they break too easily." than for a young woman to write that?!

tania cadogan said...

Katrina said...

I almost want to say its a hoax but noone would let someone do that stuff to them.

Also Her blog entry seems forged. She talks about beating someone up and someone beating her up, and then wrote (paraphrased)" I learned then girls are too fragile to fight--they break too easily." Does that not sound like something a man would say, the perspective, the way it is worded?

December 2, 2016 at 7:03 PM


Unfortunately there are people who would let someone do that stuff to them.
BDSM as an example.
Master/slave relationships which can even include having the slave registered online, signing of contracts and even to what we would consider torture, things like branding (often those who follow the gorean lifestyle (books written by John Norman about a counter Earth where slavery is the norm and can and does involve violence, branding and the like. Also those who are into BDSM hate those who follow the gorean lifestyle and vice versa)
Also it can include cutting (derogatory words seem to be a favorite)
They can live the lifestyle 24/7 and the slave will perhaps be confined to a cage, chained or bound and so on.
The branding etc would be consensual in such relationships.

Then there is domestic violence.
She could have been a victim of DV and is too scared to admit it, fear of consequences perhaps.
She could also have such low self esteem she would allow anything to be done to her because she thinks she deserves it.
It could be that she went off willingly and things went badly wrong and she is seeking to conceal the truth for reasons known only to herself.

It could be that someone known to her arranged her abduction and torture, perhaps they were having an affair and she was in the way.

it could even be that this was a hoax in order to perhaps start a fund and get megabucks to fund a 'search' to help with medical bills, maybe to get a point across such as to foster hatred against a specific group or nationality.
Perhaps even just for the media attention.

Personally, it rings odd that she was abducted, kept and released by 2 Mexican women.
Men or a man i could understand but women no.
What would be their motive, especially since it seems no ransom was paid (although the fact the reward was withdrawn the day prior to her release, withdrawn or paid?)

I would be looking at their finances, if there is infidelity, if there are relationship issues or something else.

It is hinky for sure, especially if she was in such a bad state as claimed yet she was released from hospital the next day.
the husbands language is weird, all about how amazing and wonderful his wife is , her suffering and yet no anger against her alleged abductors or demands they be found.

Anonymous said...

Keith Papini in a TV interview: "I know she's screaming for me now."

Buckley said...

So would that mean they don't suspect him of involvement? It would seem if they thought he was involved, they'd want him to blab to the media, right? To see what leaks out? Really asking.

Katrina said...

Tania, thank you, and that was a thorough exploration of what may have happened.

Yes, BDSM can be extreme, along with people just letting other people do very stupid stuff to them, and come to think of it, I remember this girl I knew (not well) years ago who let some idiot "brand" her...and it was a large brand on her upper arm, and when I saw it, it was unbelievably infected...I had never spoken to her before but i said "Look you need to go to the hospital immediately. It looks like you have gangrene setting in." It was unbelievably infected! And I kept wondering WHY would someone have let someone do that to them?! I think it was just because she wanted to try to fit in with that tattoo/weirdo crowd but seriously?! You would have to have VERY low self-esteem.

I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt that this is a case of DV as you suggested as a possibility as well.
It seems she was beaten brutally, hair chopped off (I doubt she would consent to that--women are pretty attached to their long hair), nose broken(!)...the hubby's blubbering crying is unbelievably fake.

Anon, yes that is VERY disturbing he said that "I know she's screaming for me now."
Along with all of his insults towards her appearance...normally a person would feel tender and nurturing if they saw a loved one bruised and beaten, their heart would hurt, they would not feel revulsion?!?! And go on and on about how disgusting she looks?!?!

I will def watch the 2020.

C. Chang said...

We did not learn...uh, in China, we do not learn of Sherri Papinni unsolve mystery. I will be edge of seat to learn more with 2020 later tonight. How you say? Thank you.

C Chang said...

I have watched Gilligan Island before for American TV. But no crime show.

Anonymous said...

C. Chang or C Chang (you did it both ways) I hope you will be watching 20/20 tonight in just a few short minutes on ABC.

C Chang said...

2020 on for 9 o'clock? I thought 10. I have trouble with sitting still before 10, this will be how you say? hard for Chang to do.

Anonymous said...

oh shit it's 10, I was wrong.

C Chang said...

It's no problem for Chang. Chang will watch at 10:00.

Anonymous said...

"I told myself she's alive and you just GOT to be happy. They branded her." (disgusted look)

Anonymous said...

"90% of the time they are at the store or they are...hiding under the bed"

Anonymous said...

Watching it now. He weeps / he has tears, so many tears! / he sobs!

Anonymous said...

10:09 YEH!! HA HA!!

Anonymous said...

Right--he's wracked with tears and uncontrollable sobs

Anonymous said...

The "birds circling" thing is rich.

Anonymous said...

WTF?! His name is "Gamble"?! Is California like a different planet or something?

Anonymous said...

"I didn't know if it was going to work, but I was not going to not try it."

Keith Papini tonight on 20 20 talking about hiring that ransom guy.

Anonymous said...

Oh my God, this is so surreal! The "Gamble" guy has "containers" that simulate every captivity environment around the world?!?! And Just happens to contact Papini?! Gee, ya think maybe Gamble had her locked in one of his many captivity containers?! wtf is going on???

Anonymous said...

Hubby probably hired Gamble to lock her in a container for 3 weeks!!!

Anonymous said...

That's what I thought when I 1st read the anon ransom note is that it was the perpetrator. Just sayin.

Anonymous said...

the ransom offer note

Anonymous said...

"Her poor face"

"Got nauseating just looking at her"

?!?!?!?!?!?!

Anonymous said...

Wow, I guess if it looks too perfect to be true, it probably is.

Anonymous said...

I'm with you. I agree. There's nothing we can do about it. He'll probably get away with it.

Anonymous said...

I know right! It's really maddening!

And why is it so top secret what the brand actually is? Weird.

Anonymous said...

They said the branding is a "message" and not a "symbol".