(Note: for those unfamiliar with this case, this ABC News special would be a good place to start. Unfortunately, parts 2 and 3 are not currently available, though.)
So… I’ve been following the mysterious kidnapping case involving California ‘supermom’ Sherri Papini. To say that I’ve been ‘following’ this case is putting it mildly, actually. This case has been an obsession of mine since pretty much the day Sherri went missing, November 2, 2016. I have spent an inordinate amount of time uncovering every possible detail and trying to decide what I think happened.
I have to say, I have spent the majority of that time trying to figure out how this is NOT a hoax. If Sherri is truly a victim, then I want to believe her and offer support.
Unfortunately, I am forced to conclude that this is most likely a hoax.
The key, for me, is a 2003 blog entry posted on a skinhead website, that claims to have been written by Sherri. There are simply too many common elements between that blog post and the current kidnapping story for this to be a coincidence. There has to be some connection.
According to Sherri’s ex-husband, she denies writing the blog post with her name on it and claims that it was a prank. There is some evidence to support this claim. The writing style of the blog entry in question is similar to other blog entries on the website that were supposedly written by other people. Also, the writing style is different from Sherri’s wedding blog, so it does appear she did not write the post in question. But why is her name on it and why does it claim to tell her story, then?
I think the most reasonable explanation is that Sherri fell for some skinhead guy back in 2003. She was never really into the whole skinhead thing, but played along for the sake of the relationship. She told him some stories, those stories made it to whoever ran the skinhead website, and he wrote it up. Or possibly Sherri did write it, but it was then edited by whoever ran the website. Either way, I do believe that Sherri was the source of the stories in the skinhead article. The claim that this was a prank is simply not credible.
So if we assume there is a connection between the blog post and the current situation, what would that connection be? I see only two possibilities. Either:
A. The past stories and the current story are both the product of the same imagination.
or
B. Sherri does stuff to really piss off Latinos.
Option (A), of course, supports the idea that this is a hoax. I won’t go into it, but there is plenty of other circumstantial evidence pointing toward a hoax as well.
The thing is, if this was a hoax, how could she possibly have pulled it off? The biggest sticking point for me was where she was found. How did she get there, 140 miles away from where she was abducted? And how did she manage to appear out of nowhere at 4:30 in the morning?
THE DROP-OFF SITE PROVES SOMEONE ELSE WAS INVOLVED
In my opinion, the drop-off site proves that someone else was involved. Either an accomplice, or possibly actual abductors. It’s possible Sherri could have appeared there by herself, but not likely.
She could have worn a disguise and traveled by bus, arrived in Yolo in the evening, when she wouldn’t attract much attention, and then hid away for the big reveal. The problem, though, is where would she hide? There just aren’t any great hiding places near where she was found. Yes, there are possibilities, but they would involve a high level of risk. If this is what happened, she would have chosen some other place, somewhere with a nice forest to hide in. There are no forested areas anywhere near where Sherri was found.
I am forced to conclude that there had to be another person involved. Somebody to drive the drop-off vehicle. If this is a hoax, who might Sherri possibly know that would be involved in such a ridiculous conspiracy? I can only think of one possibility: an acquaintance from her skinhead days. Possibly her old boyfriend. I can easily believe that a skinhead might have motives of their own for being involved in such a hoax. It’s the perfect fit.
So that’s my theory. It’s a hoax, she had an accomplice, and the accomplice was likely someone she knew back in 2003.
THREE WEEKS PROVES THIS WAS NOT A HATE CRIME
While I was trying to come up with theories where this is real, one of the things that really bothered me about this case is that she was held for three weeks. That’s a long time to hold someone if this is some kind of revenge or hate crime. It’s simply not believable. On the other hand, if it’s a hoax, three weeks makes perfect sense. She would have spent the first two weeks having a nice vacation, and then the final week getting ready to be ‘found.’
BUT WAIT, WASN’T SHE HEAVILY BATTERED?
When Sherri was found, the first officer on the scene described Sherri as ‘heavily battered.’ Keith, her husband, issued a statement that included the following:
The officers warned me to brace myself. My first sight was my wife in a hospital bed, her face covered in bruises ranging from yellow to black because of repeated beatings, the bridge of her nose broken.
Her now emaciated body of 87 pounds was covered in multicolored bruises, severe burns, red rashes and chain markings. Her signature long blond hair had been chopped off. She has been branded, and I could feel the rise of her scabs under my fingers. She was thrown from a vehicle with a chain around her waist, attached to her wrists and a bag over her head. The same bag she used to flag someone down once she was able to free one of her hands. Sherri was taken from us for 22 days and suffered incredibly through both intense physical agony and severe mental torture. […] My Sherri suffered tremendously, and all the visions swirling in your heads of her appearance, I assure you, are not as graphic and gruesome as the reality.
(source: abcnews)
There’s just no way around this: I think we have to accept that she was heavily battered. There has been some speculation that she could have used make-up. One of the pins on Sherri’s pinterest account showed how to fake a broken nose for Halloween. There’s just no way she would have gotten away with that, though. We have to accept that the injuries are real.
So how is that possible? I have to admit, the extent of Sherri’s injuries gives me a lot of doubt about the hoax theory. However, it must be noted that people perpetrating hoaxes have, in the past, resorted to extreme measures. There are known hoax cases where people have even shot themselves.
The severity of Sherri’s injuries does cause me to question the hoax theory, but it doesn’t rule it out.
THE OTHER AMAZING COINCIDENCE
A girl that Sherri attended high school with went missing 18 years ago and there were similarities to Sherri’s case, leading some to believe they were connected. I believe she was even a friend of Sherri’s.
article: Sherri Papini Case Eerily Similar to Cold Case from 18 Years Ago
Since Sherri was found, the similarities have kind of fallen apart. However, if this is a hoax, it seems highly likely to me that the years-ago case served as partial inspiration. A person who was an attention seeker would no doubt have noted the massive amount of attention this missing person case garnered.
THE INNOCENT PARTIES
I believe that Keith Papini is completely innocent in all of this. There is absolutely nothing he has said or done that suggests complicity. Many people have cited his lack of eye contact during his interview with 20/20 as a sign that he was being less than truthful. However, for some people, this is perfectly normal. Just like some people are left handed, some people are uncomfortable with eye contact. It should be noted that his level of eye contact is consistent throughout the interview, including, for example, when he tells the story of how he kept Sherri’s letters from high school. Is the entire interview a lie? Of course not. He passed two lie detector tests and law enforcement has cleared him. Matt Gutman, who conducted the 20/20 interview, said he found Keith to be “entirely credible.”
Another party receiving a great deal of suspicion in this case is Cameron Gamble, the self-described “hostage negotiator.” In my view the only thing he is guilty of is exaggeration. He apparently overstated his credentials and experience. I see absolutely nothing that implicates him in an actual kidnapping. People seem to see him as part of some giant conspiracy. It is simply not a credible theory, frankly.
MY CONCLUSION
It should be noted that I am not claiming to know what happened. I have simply come up with a theory that, in my view, best fits the facts of this case. I don’t know Sherri, and my conclusions are based on the facts as currently available on the web, and nothing else.
It’s just a theory, subject to change as new facts become available.
vanTopia 