Comments by "Barbara Fairbanks" (@barbarafairbanks4578) on "NewsNation"
channel.
-
10
-
8
-
6
-
Really dislike all this speculation. The guy is innocent till proven guilty.
And yet, no one seems to be cognizant of that fact... or maybe they just plain don't want to. Because speculating about the murderer and his motives/actions/behavior maybe helps them try to make sense of this senseless murder spree and tragic taking of four beautiful lives.😢 (& ruination of many other lives).
Case in point... Steve Gonsalves comments about how Kohberger's having an unusual interest in the criminal mind, interviewing and surveying criminals the way he was...how unusual and 'not right' this was.
Well, actually this isn't unusual for a PhD student in this field of study, at all.
Let's remember, Kohberger is a Criminology PhD Student... this 'criminal mind' questionnaire was an outpicturing of his thesis - and was sanctioned by univ. faculty.
Kohberger's professor/mentor there (who btw has stated she believes he is innocent) -has said this was his thesis, and although it may seem weird and somehow 'wrong' by laypeople, it's a common branch of criminology study. And for a PhD. student to design this type of survey for their thesis is not at all unusual.
That said, I am not trying to defend Kohberger. I have no opinion as to whether he killed these precious kids, or not.
I feel overwhelming compassion for the senseless, tragic loss of Kaylee, Maddie, Ethan and Xana.
Last night, I watched these kids parents, friends, siblings & extended family members speaking at their memorial service - it was truly heartbreaking 💔.
I came away in tears and disbelief as to how they could even speak (or function) at that point.
It takes alot of courage to get up there and speak for your lost child at their memorial 💔 I'm still reeling, and I don't think I'll ever forget these kids or their families speaking at their group memorial.
I just wish people would stop with all this speculation about Kohberger in the press, on SM & newscast shows. Some of them are saying the stupidest things.
If he is found guilty by a jury, it seems to me it will be a cake walk for his atty to get him off just by virtue of the fact he was 'found guilty' by the press & the public before the preliminary hearing!
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
@johannaellsworth7105 former Chief of Scotland Yard ... oh Really? Which one would that be, exactly? There are many 'former chiefs' @ Scotland yard. And your source, for this whacky statement? A comic book?
Look, crime investigators, especially, have to believe in coincidence- in order to investigate. If they didn't believe there could be, for instance, two blue colored vehicles of the same make/model, with two different men of the same general description, each in possession of the same type firearm.... in the same general area where a crime was permitted...then they'd nab the first one they came upon as the ONLY possible suspect, because- really now...there
ARE no coincidences! So, it cannot be true there is another suspect in a blue car out there! Therefore, no 'mistaken identity' haha - and no ability to nuance between fact and fiction.
It was a complete coincidence that an Appalachian hiker came across a man on the trail, that he later swore was Brian Laundrie. He was positive...bc well, it HAD to be Laundrie bc Laundrie was familiar with the Applachian trail, the guy was bald and had a beard - furthermore he talked about his GF, and said he had to get back to her (was it Brian, totally delusional?) It HAD to be BL, because c'mon - No coincidences!
FBI followed up, found the guy - total Brian Laundrie look-alike...staring down barrel of FBI firearms.
Fortunately, FBI withheld their fire, because... guess what? They totally believe in coincidence!
3
-
@csave9205 no, they removed the Mustang because it had a Park Ranger warning 'tow-away/impound note on it, so they had to move it. They did not bring the Mustang back and repark it! They may have used the Mustang to go back and look for Brian, idk. But they did not take it then return it and leave it again.
Ya know.. some people are just stoic af. Don't show emotion. Especially, don't show emotion in public. That does not mean they are unfeeling, emotionless Volcans! When you come across someone who doesn't say much, or hardly speaks, do you assume they are incapable of speech/thought?
You are no expert in body language to be able to ascertain the Laundrie's state of mind or their emotions. You are assuming you 'know' what they feel, by their actions, or lack of actions.
You don't - nor do even those professionally trained to read body languag know what these people are thinking or feeling. . No one knows... they will speak out in due time, and then we will all know.
3
-
@michellemooresings jeeze - so much 'stuff'...details circulating round here, there, everywhere. But this.. out of the blue, a note to Brian from his parents not to hurt himself(?)
OK. THATS out of left field! Where'd that one come from!
C sure? (I think you were asking them about it, their source.
Also, C sure has said a couple times the Laundries moved the Mustang, but then returned it(?) Would l love to know the source of THAT tidbit also. Don't think that's true, (teparking the Mustang, but also didn't think Bertolino actually said 'Brian was grieving' . And someone told me where to look for that, and sure enough it is true.
The more I watch Bertolino being interviewed, the more I think ugh...he's a sleaze bag.
3
-
@judem1359 DER, Jude....I'm talking about the AVERAGE IQ-
AVERAGE.. as in a whole demographic lumped together, then AVERAGED out.
Average = adding all together, then dividing the sum by the number of records/participants - whatever... yields the AVERAGE number.
Get it now?
And, no, IQ does not normally increase with age. Knowledge can increase with age, but IQ is generally a pretty static number over a lifetime.
We are born with the number of neurons we are born with. Our synapses (connectivity between neurons) can increase over a lifetime, via brain plasticity, but we generally die with the number of neurons we were born with , unless our brains are affected by cognitive decline, for whatever reason...
Even if IQ DID increase with age, as you say, your pointing that myth out has nothing to do with my earlier statement about the AVERAGE IQ of world population - or in this case American public, I guess, which is where the average IQ of only 98 comes into play.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Belinda Hudd - OK, let's see now ...either it's a grand conspiratorial cover-up, (i.e., Brian Laundrie's faked death) with all these authorities & players in on it: NPPD, FBI, dozens of SAR units, dozens of news reporting crews, County Forensic Examiner's Crew, County Coroner, and, most recently, a National Forensic Anthropogist PhD.
OR!...YOU are demented!🥴
Umm...Oh! IDK! I can't decide! WHICH scenario is more likely?
a grand conspiracy with tens of dozens of authority figures in on it... OR ??????🤷👀🤷
3
-
@BeKindToEveryKind295 yah...the 'grieving Brian'' comment by the atty Is a rumor....he did not say 'grieving' with respect to Brian(?)
My personal opinion is that Brian Laundrie was grieving and killed himself. I agree we shouldn't be saying Brian killed Gaby, because NO ONE KNOWS what happened.
But as far as his atty slipping up and saying that Brian was grieving -IMO, someone got mixed up and heard him wrong.
He said that Brian's Dad told him Brian was upset the morning he left for the Reserve, and he wished he'd done more to stop him...'visibly upset' is how Brian's father described his son's demeanor.
Later, Bertolino said, about the Laundrie's - that they are grieving over Brian's death.
(Idk...am I incorrect here? This newscaster, Brian E is reading this question that someone wrote in...about the laundries' being concerned that Brian was 'grieving' and they were worried he might hurt himself(?)
So,, Brian E is not contesting that this was said by Bertolino (i.e., 'Brian grieving'...) when reading these questions.
So, idk - I keep reading that Bertolino did not say Brian was grieving, and yet he's reading this l 'Brian grieving' question without correcting anything.
2
-
@truth4004 'You must be a Trumper' 🤨...oh BRILLIANT DEDUCTION there 'truth'!
I'll refrain from insulting you back. I realize you are using your emotions and brain cells - - not logic - (or your reading comprehension, apparently) to deduce who I am, what my beliefs are, what my principles are, what I actually wrote.
What you've deduced from my comment has obviously been projected from your own mindset/heart, and has nothing to do with me.
I actually wrote that it made sense to me that someone in Brian's situation...
wouldnt/shouldn't call 911??? I clearly know I did not write that - did not even imply such a thing.
Therefore, your reading comprehension is not where it should be, or you have a fantastical out-of-control imagination, and lots of unresolved anger.
Just a suggestion, truth... you might try finding a solid statement you object to in some of these SM comment's sections, then jump all over THAT person - accuse THEM of being a 'trumper' (haha...that's a doosie🥴) - or whatever insult and/or name calling you feel justified in indulging in.
Go for it, truth🤪
But get a clue, truth, it's not justified here, with me - no matter how hard you want to twist around and then vomit out what I wrote...with a ridiculously different meaning. Bark up someone else's tree, truth 🌳 make sure you clearly comprehended what they wrote before you go off half-cocked. 🤪
2
-
2
-
@Melanieaeaves81 we've also 'heard' that Gaby was OCD & untreated BiPolar. She said this herself.. also admitted to Moab police, on camera, that she scratched up Brian's face.. police actually verified the fresh scratches on Brian's face- and took photo's of them. While clearly confirming Gaby had no marks on her...this was all on camera footage of the stop.
Yes, it was reported by a witness that Brian was seen slapping Gaby - shortly before the stop in Moab - this is WHY they were pulled - yet...no marks in Gabys face. What does that say? IMO it agrees with Rose's description of Brian slapping Gabys face to get her off him. But, no marks on Gabys face, shortly after the slapping incident.
None of this is my 'opinion' - I'm just stating what I've observed by watching the video, reading copy of interviews about Gaby & Brian.
Gaby's close friend, Rose, in an early, televised interview when Gaby was first missing - which I watched - Rose was asked what their relationship was like. She said toxic at times, loving at times, but up and down with lots of drama.
Rose did say that Gaby could, and did fly into a rage and attack Brian simetimes - scratching his face. Brian's response would be to either slap Gaby's face to get her out of her rage, or to put his hand over her mouth to push her off him.
In that first interview, Rose never said anything about Brian being a sociopath, a liar, or a narcissist. The worst she said about him, THEN was that he liked to get his way, but through persuasion, talking... not thru violence or threatening.
Can't find that early interview? I'm not surprised- I think it's been taken down. but I watched it myself, I'm not making this up about the face scratching and the slapping response from Brian...as reported by Rose and also admitted to by Gaby.
This was long before Gaby's body was found and all the suspicion was turned to Brian (which I can't say was unjustified, given that he had her van, had lawyered up, and went completely silent about Gaby's whereabouts).
But this interview was, apparently, before Rose subsequently decided she, in retrospect, never liked Brian, (which NOW is what she is saying).. and thought him a weirdo, a sociopath, a lier, etc. all along, from the beginning. That's her take on Brian these days, but if she thought that of him in the early interview, she didn't breath a word of it. In that early interview Rose said none of that about Brian - and even brought up how sweet Brian was could be and how he loved to make breakfast for Gaby every morning.
PLEASE DONT ANYONE READING THIS JUMP DOWN MY THROAT! It's not my opinion, I am not victim blaming, but am repeating what I saw and read as fact.
Otoh, where is it verified that Brian was a narcissist? True narcissists LOVE all the attention they can get. Was that Brian? Not from what I ever saw of him in video, or read about his past or what friends said about him. His friends said he was a loner in his school days... into Yoga and maintaining his Zen. No one said he was a narcissist, a sociopath, a liar. He was said to be jealous and possessive of Gaby. This is not narcissim, or psychosociocpathy. Just sayin...
One friend said Brian could display a quick temper, which never escalated to physical violence.
I know it sounds like I am portraying Brian as sweet/innocent & Gaby as rageful ^ mentally ill. - I'm just stating what facts I've been able to glean about both of them. Interviews and verified accounts - NOT what I'm reading in SM comments!
Truth be told, I do think Brian killed Gaby- not premeditated, but in a psychotic rage - I belueve he snapped - k completely severed with reality... that's my personal opinion, and even at that.. still there is no way I can say, 'Brian killed Gaby - its a fact!...as so many people on SM are declaring as if a FACT...that they 'know.' He killed her.
I THINK I know, but until we DO know this as a fact, we are limited to our 'opinions' about what happened.
What I do know is that it's a horrible tragedy. Sorry to say this, I know there are those who might be outraged at me for saying this, but IMO (my educated opinion) I feel that both Brian and Gaby were victims of circumstance and mental illness, gone unchecked.
Hard to get the images of their happy travel vlog videos our of my mind/my heart.. which is truly broken💔
If I knew the horrible emotional path I would have been led down watching their Van Life Travel Vlog and then following this story - I would not have dared to open this nightmare of a book💔.
2
-
@clorrainejohnson Yah. And those two little kids - who loved both Auntie Gaby & Uncle Brian learned that their Auntie was dead - from protesters outside their house- screaming this into their home with bullhorns - parading past the house with Posters of Brian & MURDERER written across his face. Can you imagine? Innocent little kids learning in the most ugly way possible- from ugly, viscious, scary strangers their aunt is dead, their uncle killed her.
And Cassie...Finally... after two days of hers kids holed up inside crying their eyes out - finally comes out and confronts these horrible people, her Melba milktoast husband by her side (sorry, but that's how I saw him). I'd have been SO incensed, and immediately find a way to put a stop to it - or FLEE with my kids or something. SOMETHING! but I wouldn't be waiting two whole days and then go outside and 'discuss' my displeasure with these sick monsters.
Idk...what's wrong with this family? Not 'normal' acting at all . Even Cassie & hubby waiting a full two days to confront these monsters.
Ack! I'm being too judgmental, I know 😒- there's enough of THAT going around, and I've been trying to withhold judgement, but - fat chance- when it comes to kids suffering psychological damage like that. It will never be something they can unsee, unhear, unknow.
Idk, I don't believe Brian was the narcissistic, sociopathic, cold-blooded murderer he's been made out to be. I just don't see any of that in their van life travel vlog, or hear/read anything like that about him in interviews of people who knew him at work or in high school. He had no history of violence- no trouble in the judicial system, no domestic violence reports, lived peacefully with Gaby & his parents for 2 years. Loved the outdoors, loved sketching, reading, writing, Yoga, and was 'worried about maintaining his Zen' (quote by a coworker who thought that made Brian a 'weirdo'.)
This, of course does not mean that someone cannot suddenly snap, break with reality and commit a violent crime. I do think this is what happened with Brian. I'm not trying to make him out as innocent. I think he killed her.
There is a REASON, though why Brian's Dad contacted Bertolino right away, and why Bertolino put the gag order on Brian & parents. Unlike you, I believe the Laundrie's knew their Son enough to know he'd confess to authorities right away. IMO, it was them (& Bertolino) that put the kabosh on even letting authorities question Brian.
I've changed from thinking that Brian lied to his parents about Gaby, and they didn't know. I now think he told them, maybe even before he got home, he killed Gaby - and that he was horrified & grief-stricken by his own actions.
This, I believe, is why his dad called Bertolino. Of course they wanted to protect Brian from prosecution, even from questioning. I think Brian went along with the plan, but was nevertheless heartbroken & grief-stricken over what he'd done.
Someone wrote in one of these comments sections - someone with a heart - that Brian couldn't live with Gaby, but couldn't live without her either. He had written something to that effect in his Pinterest account long ago. I believe that's what it boiled down to.
I think he went along with his parents & Bertolinos plan, but in the end, trashed it all and went to the reserve to kill himself.
I do think Brian had a heart and a conscience (and loved Gaby)...questionable about Bertolino & Brian's parents, IMO - can't say that about them.
Sorry for the length.. I'm still crying over this.. Wish I'd never known any of it😢 thanks for 'listening'. 🙄
2
-
@BeKindToEveryKind295 whelp! Turns out Bertolino did slip in an interview and said 'Brian was grieving.' That went ballistic among news stations. I don't watch 'the news', per se...so that's how I missed it, I guess.
So, in a follow-up interview he handled that particular slip-of-the-tongue by saying something like, 'it had been a long day... blah, blah
(of interviews, I guess?), and that all day he was saying 'grief in these interviews'... 'the Laundrie's are grieving the death of their son', etc.. and when asked about Brian's state of mind when he left for the hike, Bertolino says, in the interview, that Brian was distraught, was grieving.
He DID say it, then recanted it the following day in another interview - says he found himself saying 'grieving' all day and unfortunately blurted that out in regards to Brian, then said that no Brian was upset, distraught, but not grieving.
I tend to not believe anything Bertolino says. He's very slick in these interviews. If I could blame anyone for this whole mess, it'd be him. (Not about Gaby, of course, but all the fallout with his stupid gag order). He's been shifty about when Brian's dad first contacted him about 'this matter'. In one interview, he said ' 'early on' - which, to me, meant early Sept. He said Chris Laundrie called him because 'LE & FBI are hanging around, asking questions, and 'What do I do?' So Bertolino says he told them & Brian not to say anything to anyone. When pinned down about the date, he said from the 11th & onward.
Well, the family AND Brian 'went silent' on 9/1 -about Gaby's whereabouts. Long before the 11th.
I used to think Brian came home and lied to his parents about Gaby. I no longer think that. I think he was horrified and grief-stricken at what he'd done and told his parents right away, possibly before he got home on 9/1. I think his Dad
Called Bertolino right away and said, 'What do we do?' Bertolino tells them to go silent about it. It only makes sense they knew early Sept. because Gabys folks were trying to find Gaby and calling Brian & his parents long before the 11th - nearly 2 weeks prior to the 11th, I believe, they started calling the Laundries and Brian, and What???? Complete silence!- not even taking their calls.
Now Bertolino wants us to believe he advised silence on the 11th? Who told all of them to go silent before that?
It was after watching Bertolino trying to wiggle his way out of the 'silencing' date in the interview, and then the 'grieving' statement, that I changed my belief that Brian told no one and his parents didn't know & were just following the gag order from their Atty.
Now I believe Brian told them right away, they called Bertolino and hunkered down in silence from then on. I also truly believe Brian was in a psychotic state when he killed Gaby - he was not in touch with reality, IMO. This can and does happen to people under immense stress - people who are already on the far ledge of depression, about to go over. like we heard about his out of conyrol behavior in the Wyoming RR, yelling at the Hostess. He was in a very poor state of mind, AND this wasn't like him. People can break with reality and not know what they are doing when they enter psychosis. I think his parents pressured him to follow the Bertolino plan - stay silent, evade LE, don't let Authorities question you. I think his parents and Bertolino all knew Brian enough to realize he'd confess right away. I think he was basically a basket case at that point. I think he was grieving all along, but followed the plan....until the 13th, then overcome with grief he goes 'hiking' @ the Reserve - 'hiking' being a euphemism for suicide. I am convinced Brian loved Gaby - he broke with reality when he killed her, IMO. I've watched their Van life Travel Vlogs, read about both their backgrounds - I just don't see in Brian anything sinister calculating, narcissistic, or psycho-sciopathic. He looked vulnerable, to me, in some of those shots - they both did, at times. In so many of their video interactions he looked open, conscientious, sweet toward Gabby - happy to be with her. He did have a jealous & possessive side, but Gaby also had a rageful side. Only their sweet, loving sides were filmed in their vlog, of course, and it's hard to imagine they had physical fights, but there was plenty of documentation on that part of the relationship, just not filmed, of course.
Very sad 😔 heartbreaking 💔 😢
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@judem1359 OMG - you have no idea - neuropsychological??? Wtf! Psychology has nothing to do with this.
Neuroscience has everything to do with what I am talking about. The field of psychology and neuroscience are two entirely different sciences. Actually, psychology is not based on science anyway. It's based on human behavior....well, o.k., the 'science' of human behavior - but basically the field of psychology is not measurable....neuroscience IS measurable.
Read Robert Sapolsky PhD - maybe you'll grasp my meaning here.
You have to be making up what you think you know about human intelligence.
As I said, we are born with the number of neurons we are born with, AND unless through brain trauma or disease, (i.e., loss or shrinkage of grey matter (translates to loss of neurons, thus cognitive decline, as we see in Alzheimers' disease), the number of neurons we are born with remain fairly static throughout our lifetime. Neurons are formed in the fetus, and do not measurably increase throughout an individuals lifespan (the exception is that sometimes through, say, BDNF (brain derived neurotropic factor) it's possible to increase # of neurons NOMINALLY). To a NOMINAL degree - that means a barely measurable increase.
Again...just in case you missed it - it IS possible to (via BDNF and/or process of learning, brain exercises, etc. ), to increase the number of synapses in the brain., i.e., increased connectivity btw neurons...by a measurable amount.
synapse = connective spaces btw neurons that carry neurotransmitters from one neuron or cluster of neurons to another neuron/cluster. This allows increased connectivity of neurons in the brain, which translates to a faster thought process & increased access to memory & learning.
I have no idea why you cannot seem to grasp that I am referring to the AVERAGE IQ of a demographic number of people- i.e. a COLLECTIVE.
The AVERAGE IQ of this collective!
This does not mean that everyone is born with an IQ of 98, (or100, as you say) and it increases as we grow. I'm not talking about an individual's IQ being 98. (Though some within this collective DO have an IQ of 98).
I'm talking about the collective AVERAGE IQ of a demographic number (of people). It is currently @ 98 points in U.S - within that average there are some with a triple digit IQ - say 120, or 135 -whatever - there are those with IQ's upwards of 160 - even 200+)
The highest IQ is currently of a 21 YO from Ireland w/an IQ of 263 (measured originally @ the age of 8). He HAD this IQ at the age of 8 - he's 21 now and his IQ has not changed.
Most of the renowned genuises of today were measured at around 8 or 10 YO, and their IQ's have not changed (or increased with age, which you seem to think is possible).
THEN there are those - many more within this collective demographic with only a double digit IQ (considered 'low'). These are added to the collective to find the average IQ. THIS is why the AVERAGE IQ in this measured demographic is down to only 98 - BECAUSE all these IQ's are added together, then divided by the number of people counted in the overall demographic - this formula (addition/division of the sum) gives us the AVERAGE IQ of an entire collective demographic.
Einstein's IQ was somewhere btw 205 and 225.
DER! ...Get it now??
(If not - I give up) bc I've tried to explain this every which way from sundown.
2
-
@JupiterRising2525 Look, Andie - you made this statement, like it's the truth, 'the public is not stupid.'
I merely pointed out (with details about our public's average IQ, and how this 'Average' IQ has been mathematically arrived at). Some here, who were able to understand my point did not feel insulted, and agreed that yes, unfortunately, the general public can be 'stupid'. It 8s a fact...we cannot say, 'the general public is not stupid'
Its is untrue....however anyone can have that opinion. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not 'their own' FACTS.
Sorry that you feel insulted by my comments about IQ and how the average IQ of 98 has been derived at. As far as your comment that my IQ 'must be to insult others' - makes no sense. You are referring to Intent, not 8Q with that statement... Intent has nothing to do with IQ.
I responded to your comment with facts - my INTENT was to state facts - not to insult anyone. I'm not going to apologize for stating facts. I am sorry that you've chosen to feel insulted by what I wrote. You do have a choice, Andie.
What I wrote was factual, not an attack on you or anyone else.
2
-
@IM125 Ah! YES!
one voice reaching out frim the darkness with the unbiased truth. Thank you for pointing that out! We know this to be true. Saw it with our own eyes, scratches on Brian's face - earlier videos of the Moab stop. Police asking Brian about facial scratches - photographing the scratches, in fact - Gabby' admitting in that stop that she went after Brian first & scratched up his face.
And YET...not one mention of any of that in this (poor excuse for) journalistic 'reporting'.
This 'newscast' is actually a joke. Chock full of wild conjecture, sensationalism based on biased opinion, editing out of relevant information and police bodycam footage.
Yes, Brian's face was scratched up. Gabby admitted to going after Brisn first.
AND what's been especially swept under the rug is the televised interview - very early on - of Gabby's close friend Rose when asked about Gabby/Brian's relationship (I watched this interview myself) Rose said that Gabby would get frustrated with Brian and attack him, scratch up his face. Brian, in response, would put his hand over her mouth to push him off her, or slap her face to get her off.
If this so-called 'Newscast' about events in this murder case, and Brian & Gabbys relationship, weren't such a biased JOKE these 'reporters' would be bringing us the whole story, including Rose's televised interview. They would have 'dug up' that interview and at least mentioned it here. Instead they are editing out highly RELEVANT parts of the Moab bodycam footage - playing UP other parts of the footage (parts tgey want to sensationalized) and conjecturing on comments made by the coroner and officers involved.
A complete joke, as far as I am concerned. Biased and 3rd rate 'reporting'.
2
-
2
-
Gaby was also observed attacking brian and scratching his face. Brian was observed slapping Gabby off of him in these attacks, or putting his hand over her mouth, grabbing her face in these attacks. This was FULLY described by Gabby's best friend, Rose, in an early, EARLY interview before Gabby was found. I doubt this interview is up for watching anymore. None of this is mentioned anymore. However, at one time it was pretty much common knowledge about the physical fights that took place in their relationship. Rose never mentioned this in later interviews. This is not hearsay, I watched that interview and U know what Rose said.
I also watched the earlier (Moab police stop bodycam) viewing of Gabby who admitted scratching Brian's face, to officers, in the Moab stop. Indeed these scratches on Brian's face were noted by police in that traffic stop. They told Brian they needed to photograph his face scratches as evidence. This was clearly seen in some of the 1st viewings of this body cam, (I watched this myself) bodycam video of the stop. This part of the body cam video is no longer being shown. Gabby's description of her attacking Brian FIRST and scratching his face (during the Moab Police stop) - no longer being shown, or mentioned...by anyone (on social media, by witnesses, by newscasters.)
WHY?? I'm not saying I doubt Brian killed Gabby. What I'm saying is that THE ORIGINAL viewing of the bodycam video where,Gabby admits to scratching Brian's face FIRST - the observations of scratches. By police, and in photo's, of Brian's face- NO LONGER BEING MENTIONED. Gabby's friend Rose describing their physical fights (Gabby attacking, scratching Brian's face, Brian slapping her away - NO LONGER MENTIONED - Hushed up! BUT, Gabby later in the stop describing Brian grabbing HER face - that is being PLAYED UP here - again, with no mention of Gabby stating she scratched Brian's face first. Clear case of BIASED newscaztinv here!
2
-
2
-
sharon russomanno - maybe in retrospect during her convo with protesters (if that's what you are referring to, 'things she said') - but the camping trip was on the 6th, Gaby wasn't a missing person until the 11th, and Brian wasn't running from authorities at that point.
My impression of that comment that she 'lost her parents' was bc they weren't speaking with her under Bertolino's advice. And then,
of course, lost her future SIL because she was deceased, and lost Brian bc he was missing, at that point.
IMO, the Laundrie's ruined their lives and those around them by following Bertolino's advice not to talk to anyone. Brought untold sorrow down on their heads, as well as their daughter, SIL, and their grandkids. Worse advice ever... Bertolino's🙄
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@John-hp9mv John, your 'story' is evolving' - you never 'just stated'..until now...that if they (Brian's parents) have both sets of keys it means...blah blah.
What you originally asked was - 'Were the Mustang keys found with Brian's effects? (paraphrasing here). And then you indicated that IF not, keys not found with Brian's effects then Brian's parents would have got them from Brian when they got the car.
I pointed out that this was not Brian's car, AND that there were probably 2 sets of keys (all my vehicles have always had 2 sets of keys). My son used to borrow my car - he had his set, I had mine.
Can you just admit that you originally thought that if no Mustang keys were found with Brian's remains, then the parents 'got the keys from Brian' weeks ago when they picked up the car - that's what you wrote.
I pointed out, it proves nothing bc, there could be 2 sets of keys.
Now you say you were just pointing out that 'if Brian's parents have both sets of keys - THEN it means... whatever...
And, no - get real - that was not what you originally implied. Truth be told, whoever has whatever sets of keys, means absolutely nothing - too many variables - Brian could have tossed the keys away when he got there - could have left the set he used inside the vehicle - maybe there weren't 2 sets, maybe there weren't... can't deduce anything by counting the number of keys to the vehicles or who has them. If the parents have both sets, then Brian could have left his set inside the vehicle - so it actually doesn't 'prove' anything.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Also, I think Gaby's phone was not recovered?...anywhere - in the van, near her remains, nor in the items seized by FBI when they searched the Laundrie residence. The computer was in possession of the van, I think? and was seized along with the van. But, no one could be charged with theft of these items (except perhaps the phone) without the owner reporting them stolen (tragically impossible, as we know).
Brian had possession of all these items as a natural outcome of his being Gaby's traveling companion, involved in their mutual Van Life Travel Vlog. (All except for the phone, I think, which didn't turn up anywhere, anyway (from my understanding, but I could be wrong about that...not sure).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So, yah 'let's keep an eye on Brian'...just RHETORIC? but no real plan?
Big difference between saying, 'hey, let's DO this'... and then what?...no plan gets effected? Everyone thought everyone else, or SOMEONE would follow through with a plan?
WTH!!
And THEN to quickly follow that statement, 'we decided to keep an eye on Brian, but obviously, we missed that...then immediately follow with, 'Well, he wasn't actually charged with anything...
NOT THE POINT! They decided to keep an eye on Brian because he was a person of interest in a crime! NOT because he was charged with anything. But then the excuse for failing to tail Brian as a Persin of Interest, becomes... 'Well, he wasn't charged with anything."
Just incompetent af!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ninasmith4099 thanks for clarifying. Obviously I missed statements released by media attributed to the Laundrie's. Possibly the statement was passed on to media through Bertolino? Oddly, never heard of Brian being on meds or, in fact, any mental health diagnosis for him - doesn't mean its not true, and I obviously missed something there too..
I did watch the dashcam footage of the Moab stop. Pretty sure Gaby said she's OCD & Bipolar? Didn't hear anything about meds, though.
I can't go back and watch...just too painful, all around (still in tears over this whole tragedy😢) - I am one of those (few) trying to withhold judgement and have complete empathy for both Gaby & Brian & both families. I know that sounds very odd.
I did watch Rose's (Gabys close friend) interview in early Sept, or maybe late Aug, before Gaby was found- long before she was officially a missing person. Rose was asked about their relationship. She did say Gaby would attack Brian in a rage and scratch his face & he would put his hand over her mouth, or slap her face to get her off him. That's what gave me the idea Gaby's Bipolar condition was out of control. I know, first hand, how Bipolar sufferers can just 'go off' in a hateful rage. So, when Brian had scratches on his face in the Moab stop (police took photo's of his facial scratches) - it sort of made sense, to me, that he was earlier seen slapping her...then they are pulled over and he's injured but she has no marks. They both had a sweet side, but dark sides as well, IMO. The worst Rose could say about Brian in that early interview was that Brian liked to have his own way. But she did clarify it wasn't thru threatening or physical violence. He was just insistent and Gabby would get frustrated with him. She said Brian doted on her and made her breakfast every morning. Her later interview- after Gabys body was found and Brian was on the lam, and all the silence from the Laundrie's - she's saying NOW she felt all along Brian was a sociopath. That he was a liar and she thought he was a bad guy from the beginning - absolutely nothing in her later interviews about how sweet Brian was, or anything about the face scratching incidents - that's all disappeared from her verbiage now, like she never said it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
You have absolutely NO IDEA what happened here in this stop, or between these 2 people, OR why Gabby said she hit Brian first.
According to Rose, gabbys close friend, in a very early interview about their relationship - Rose said Gabby would go off on BRIAN - attack him, scratch his face. In response, Rose SAID, (I watched this interview) that Brian would grab Gabby face, or slap her face to get her off him.
Rose clearly said this in this early interview- I watched it myself. She cannot unsay theze things- BUT since Gabbys body has been found, this interview is N/A...I believe it's been taken down No, she cannot unsay this, but yes, this can - and has- been hushed.
This was in response to an interview of Gabbys friend Rose, when asked what Brian & Gabby's relationship was like.
Has it occurred to you that the reason Gabby said she hit Brian first, Is because she DID?! This was a known pattern in their relationship. I'm not trying to defend Brian or trying to declare innocence on his part, or any type of self defense on his part, which would be ludicrous to even imply.
What I AM pointing out is this newscast, in particular, is OBVIOUSLY very BIASED - for Gabby, against Brian.
NOTHING whatever mentioned about the scratches on Brian's face PHOTOGRAPHED by police in this stop.
What we have here is alot of conjecture mostly by ALL WOMEN who THINK they know the truth here - pieced together & based on their so-called knowledge of domestic violence.
And because they cannot deny the fact that Gabby told police herself that she went after Brian first, these women, piecing together this story about this traffic stop and Gabby/Brian's relationship - they pretty much HAVEto conclude Gabby said that under pressure, and it wasn't true (hitting Brian first) because to say otherwise (maybe she DID attack him first) would not fit with their, obviously hugely biased opinion.
The truth is - as stated directly by Rose in that early interview, this was an established pattern in their relationship- Gabby would go after Brian, scratch up his face, & in response Brian would put his hand over her mouth, or slap her face to get her off him.
All this verifiable information about the Brian/Gabby relationship...just swept under the rug.
Completely BIASED reporting - based on information edited out about the Moab stop (i.e., photographs of Brian's facial scratches -no mention whatsoever). While OTHER parts of the Moab stop PLAYED UP (Gabby saying her face hurt where he grabbed her). This is NOT in ANY WAY factual journalism. It is filled with conjecture, editing out of verifiable information WE KNOW happened, and playing up the parts they want to sensationalize.
Shame on these third rate 'reporters'. 😕 ...and this is WHY they are 3rd rate...
BIASED AF!
1
-
1
-
@lornocford6482 my gripe was with these newscasters who mentioned not a word about the scratches on Brian's face. Or the fact that police photographed these scratches. NOT.ONE.WORD.
Instead, the footage of Gabby holding her face is shown, with LOTS of conjecture by these women that although Gabby did say to police that she went after Brian FIRST...well, what that really means is that this is typical of DV victims. They will always blame themselves. This is conjecture on their part - tgey were not there - Police WERE there assessing tge situation (oh, but those officers were also victimizing Gabby - gimme a break - whatever evidence there was that Gabby went after Brian first...nope that's all discounted- not true...a clear-cut case of DV. Completely BIASED so-called 'reporting here'. And if by my pointing that out, you believe I am somehow being disrespectful of these people and their 'professionalism'? Well, then...you have a major issue with your own sense of what's right. I am not disrespecting these people,I am pointing out how biased, one-sided and 3rd rate this 'reporting' is.
Your 'perception' that I'm angry bc I can't accept that Gabby was a victim of DV.(?) Sorry, your intuition, or crystal ball, or whatever hyper-perceptive means by which you've come to that conclusion is dead wrong. Idk if Gabby was the victim of DV, or if Brian was, or if anybody was here. Neither do you. Yes, I am angry. I am angry at the hugely one-sided and over-the-top biased 'reporting' in this so-called newscast.
Also, completely missing is Gabby - which I believe I did mention in the comment you've taken such offense to. Gabby's friend, Rose - very early on in this case- gave a televised interview on what she observed about Gabby/Brian's relationship. Rose truthfully (I believe...why would she make this up?) That Gabby would get frustrated with Brian and how after him (unprovoked) and scratch his face. In response Brian would put his hand over her mouth, or slap her dace to get her off of him. Where is ANY mention of this interview- these facts? Missing. Of course. And I've no doubt that these reporters are well aware if tgat interview- or should be! I mean, I know about it, I watched that interview! I absolutely refuse to thing these 'reporters' don't know about that interview. I doubt you have mentioned it in your response to my comment - (unsure bc I didn't read the whole thing). But I suspect you left any mention of that out of your response. I am so sick of so many who think they KNOW everything that happened here , stating what amounts to their opinion, as if it's fact. You are another one convinced you can look into someone else's mind and KNOW what they are thinking...totally wrong about why I am angry...but nice try.
1
-
@lornocford6482 wrong again Lorn....even more outrageous you somehow think you 'know' my background, what my education is (or lacking in)
even so far as to say you KNOW I refuse to be educated in the matter of abuse or DV.
There ya go again, Lorn... just can't help yourself can ya? :/
What I am stating that I know ARE facts (ever hear of those?). Where I offer my opinion, I've made clear its my opinion. Actully, I've offered very few opinions here in the comments section (about this case - NOT the reporting, which I have plenty of opinion on - IMO this is biased, highly subjective, NOT objective, reporting).
But I appreciate sticking to the facts about this case mainly bc I am trained in the scientific method, and science disdains speculation passed off as 'fact'. An hypothesis is fine, but still a hypothesis is not fact, until proven so - beyond doubt.
We are all entitled to our own opinions - no one is entitled to their own facts. Although many, including yourself seem to think they are.
Opinion is not fact. Conjecture is not fact. Speculation is not fact. Educated guesses (gone WILD in this newscast) - NOT FACT.
I know what Rose said in her interview- that Gabby would go after Brian, scratch Brian's face - he would slap her away or grab her mouth. IMO, this is factual because I watched that interview - therefore I take what Rose said as fact.
I also take as fact that Brian's face was scratched in the Moab stop - we saw that in bodycam footage - it's a fact that police took photo's of the scratches - another fact I gleaned from watching that footage.
Idk HOW any of that came about in that particular incident, nor do you, or anyone else - but y'all think you know.
In my opinion, Gabby MAY HAVE gone after Brian first. I say MAY HAVE because I wasn't there to actually see that, nor were you or others who are speculating and trying to pass it off as fact.
I have never implied I KNOW Gabby went after Brian first. My OPINION is that she may have because...
1) she said so - and, 2) per her closest friend, Rose, this was an established pattern in their relationship - Gabby would go after Brian, unprovoked (physically unprovoked, but 'provoked' in the sense that Gabby's frustration with Brian wanting his own way would mount to the point of lashing out and scratching his face) - he would slap her away or grab her mouth and push her off of him.. I do not know this is what transpired exactly in this incident - but the FACT is that Gabby admitted to it, and Rose described this as an established pattern in their relationship. Was it true in this instance? I DON'T KNOW!
Nor do you, nor do all the others in this newscast (& many in the comment section) who speculate, then state their speculations as fact. Exactly as you continue to do (and now you continue to speculate MY motivations🤣) - you speculate out of your own ignorance & wild imagination, then present it as fact, you've somehow convinced yourself you
KNOW🧐
Where I express my opinion, I state so. Where you, and so many others here state your (biased) opinions, you want to convince others its a fact.
Like I originally commented, Lorn, stop making stuff up.
Do us all a favor...don't quit your day job and go off thinking you've got talent as some kind of investigative reporter. You seem to want to also dabble in precognition, clairvoyance & armchair psychology.
Sorry, Lorn - IMO you hold no talents their either.
Just stop that. O.K.? You are making a fool of yourself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
we photo gal - IMO, If Gabby was emotionally beat down by Brian I don't think she'd have been opening the van door he thought was locked and crawled right over him to get to the passenger seat. This was reported by eye witnesses, as to how the slapping incident ended- 'they ran up and down the street - he reached the van first, jumped in the driver's side and locked her out - he thought - but the driver's side was not locked and she ran around, opened the driver's side door and crawled over him to get into the van.
just sayin...so many things so many think they have all figured out - even in the Moab stop, but which makes no sense - not to me, anyway. Someone, supposedly my aggressor locking themselves away from me inside a vehicle, then I strong-arm the driver's door and crawl right over my 'aggressor' to get inside the vehicle? And I'm supposedly beaten down by this person? How does that make any sense?
Also, I won't soon forget Gabby's friend Rose in a very early televised interview when asked about their relationship...describing Gabby's frustration with Brian wanting his own way and 'going after him' and scratching his face. This was apparently a pattern in their relationship.
I watched that interview. The worse thing Rose could say about Brian - at that time - was that he liked to have his own way. This frustrated Gabby to the point of rage and she'd 'go after' Brian. In response to Gabby trying to scratch his face, Brian would slap her face, or grab her face to push her off of him. Rose said this in the interview. I watched the interview. No one is mentioning it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
John Walsh is talking out of his horrific hurt from many years ago - which will always be with him, will never wane😪 and I am so, so sorry for his pain. Horrible, horrible pain that will never leave him, I realize that 💔
But...now that Brian's remains have been found and ID'd as Brian Laundrie.... And, yes he probably killed himself, just as Mr. Walsh implored him to do in a very public way, I am told -
I think that at this point everyone has to admit...no one has been hiding ('the guilty coward' )Brian Laundrie out - on the Aplachian trail, or anywhere else.
John Walsh has vilified Brian Laundrie and his 'dirty Laundrie' parents... declatex tgem all guilty in the press, on SM, in the public' eye, and every which way he possibly could.
How can this ugly, name calling rhetoric pissibly help, any cause, in any way?!
I agree , keep these suspects /fugitives & lost children in the public eye as much as possible - but the ugly, dark, hateful rhetoric...again, more harmful & damaging than can possibly be helpful.
As a result of John Walsh's hateful rhetoric about Brian Laundrie AND his family...with a whole host of people behind Mr. WAalsh- including nasty, ugly, obnoxious PROTESTERS outside the Laundrie family home AND, of course, outside CASSIE's home (Brian's sister) - where therein, live two young boys - innocent kids who loved their Auntie Gaby and their Uncle Brian.
What I am getting to, is how unfortunate that John Walsh, & others finding Brian and his parents GUILTY and letting loose with this viscious 'Dirty Laundrie' rhetoric....and what do we see? Two innocent little boys emotionally hurt, psychologically damaged. beyond belief.
So ironic that John Walsh and his people - connected with this 'Save The Children' movement - and here are two little boys broken hearted, horrified, having learned in the harshest, ugliest way posible of a horrible tragedy that SHOULD be broken to innocent children in the kindest, gentlest way possible.
But No....Protesters outside these kids house shouting the ugly news through Bullhorns - all hours of the day and night - that their Auntie Gaby is dead, and their Uncle Brian is a murderer. Protesters parading past the windows of their home with Posters of their uncle, with MURDERER! scrawled across his face.
Probably true... maybe, not, that Brian is guilty. Probably true, but maybe not, that the Laundrie's knew what happened to Gaby.
But these protesters are propped up, beefed up, aggressively & smugly CONFIDENT in their ugly actions outside Cassie's home where two little boys are cowering/crying - seeing ugly things they'll never UN-SEE, hearing ugly things they'll never UN-HEAR, knowing ugly things about this world at TOO YOUNG AND INNOCENT AN AGE, that they will never be able to UN-KNOW.
God Bless John Walsh and all the devastated parents belonging to this most dreaded Club that no one wants to belong to. But, PLEASE know that your words (which may or may not be true) has the power to reach and support nasty uncaring people, and to devastate the lives of innocent children.
Please, please, be careful with your words... and may God Bless all of you 💝💜🙏
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@John-hp9mv John, I comprehended completely what you wrote. Because I proved you have no idea how to deduce facts and come to a logical conclusion...that must mean I d/n comprehend your meaning? Nope, wrong again, John...here again you've concluded incorrectly.
I was the only one who responded to your comment? And that proves, somehow, that everyone else must have agreed with you? Do you realize how laughable a 'deduction' that is?🤣
(its more comical than the 'Brian Laundrie & the lost/found Mustang keys' deduction.
Maybe you DID mean something other than what you wrote?, idk.
There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. it's post grad level, in case you're wondering.
If you DID mean to convey something other than what I clearly comprehended, I suggest you learn to improve your writing skills.
Frankly, I do think you really DID believe that if no keys were found with Brian's
effects/remains, that means his parents got the keys from him when they moved the car weeks ago. That is what you wrote...no getting around it.
Don't leave your day job anytime soon to be any type of investigator....OK, John?
(And my names not 'betty'...
I'll 'move along' when I see fit, John...don't worry about it. 😉
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1