20/20

[ari333]

1 minute ago, raiderred1 said:

Did anyone catch the latest episode, "Finding Sherri"?  That poor woman is going to be scarred both physically and mentally for the rest of her life.  At first I was very suspicious of the husband and then I wasn't. Who the hell took her, branded her and beat the hell out of her for weeks???  This is scary stuff!

I didn't know the titles was "Finding Sherri." It was disturbing, but something seemed like it was missing. Maybe it's  the fact that the case is so new in thatshe was just recovered on Thanksgiving and LE have no motives or suspects.

It was sad that all those cars passed her. Most folks have cell phones. Finally some thoughtful person called 911 which is the least some passerby could do (if they are too afraid to stop)

[Madding crowd]

I'm sure the police are holding a lot back on Sherri's case since the investigation is ongoing. A couple of things seemed odd: the way the husband took photos of her cell phone to show the police. I would have grabbed it to see if she had an recent calls and maybe look for a person who was ill or injured. I know the police would want you to take photos and not touch the phone,  just dont see someone doing it. Also thought it strange the day care didn't call the husband if the kids were not picked up.  I think a lot more will come out of this.

Edited December 3, 2016 by Madding crowd

[raiderred1]

I can usually feel a lot of compassion for a victim's family but I just was not moved by the husband's emotions.  Ari333, you are right that there is something just off about this case.  I also hate when a woman is called a "Super Mom".  You don't have to be all things to everyone, relax a little! 

We had a case early this year of a woman getting killed early in the morning at her church where she had a fitness class.  There is video of a strange person(moved like a woman) in what looks like SWAT gear but I don't think the crime has ever been solved.  I also had a side eye for the husband in this case.  

Madding crowd, I agree the cellphone detail was very strange.  Is it common for people to have an app to follow their mates cellphone?  Seems a bit controlling for me.  He had that app but they didn't use FB?  Alrighty then!  I thought Millennials were into "everything" social media.  I'm over 35 and I am not on any SM-FB, Twitter, Snapchat, blah, blah, blah. Couldn't care less, but I have always bucked the system. ;)

Edited December 3, 2016 by raiderred1

[ChiCricket]

2 hours ago, Madding crowd said:

 Also thought it strange the day care didn't call the husband if the kids were not picked up.  I think a lot more will come out of this.

This was one part that didn't strike me as strange at all. My daughter is a SAHM, who pays a certain fee to a local daycare so her 4 yo son can go there (up to 3 days a week) when she has errands to run, doctor appointments,etc. She (and the day care) never know from week to week what days and times he'll be there, so maybe they didn't know when she was going to pick them up. You just have to sign them in, and then sign them out when you get them. 

[Madding crowd]

I guess all schools and day cares are different then. I used to teach preschool and also ran some day care for errands programs. We were flexible about drop off times but always asked when the parent would be picking the kids up. Our teachers needed to know how long they would be working day to day and we also didn't want the children to be upset by allowing parents totally  open pick up times. I would think the day care would be closed by the time the man came home from work though unless he usually came home earlier than 5 pm. I continue think there is something odd about the story. They showed tons of posed pictures on the show and they looked exactly like the ones that would normally be on social media, yet the husband said they were very private. I guess we will have to stay tuned!

[Maharincess]

3 hours ago, Madding crowd said:

I guess all schools and day cares are different then. I used to teach preschool and also ran some day care for errands programs. We were flexible about drop off times but always asked when the parent would be picking the kids up. Our teachers needed to know how long they would be working day to day and we also didn't want the children to be upset by allowing parents totally  open pick up times. I would think the day care would be closed by the time the man came home from work though unless he usually came home earlier than 5 pm. I continue think there is something odd about the story. They showed tons of posed pictures on the show and they looked exactly like the ones that would normally be on social media, yet the husband said they were very private. I guess we will have to stay tuned!

I don't understand what the last part of this comment means?  People take posed portraits and pictures all the time without posting them on social media.  I have a lot of those pictures and never once posted them anywhere. I'm confused by what you mean. 

[AngelinaMaria]

I don't want to be inflammatory, but all of the many, many photos of her, her and her husband, her and her husband and her kids sure seemed to indicate that she was very proud of her looks and her "life".  It reeked a bit of "white privileged pride".  Who has that many professional photos of themselves?  And, she was absolutely picture perfect in every one.  It just didn't seem like a "real" life to me.  Hoax or not, I don't know but there are many, many red flags.

[Madding crowd]

That's kind of what I meant. A lot of their pictures looked to me like the types of pics seen on FB, Instagram etc . Given their ages and the fact that most people take their pictures wth their phone, it seemed odd that me that they were too private for social media. They didn't look like family photos to me, they looked like Sherri modeling a 'perfect family'. Sorry if my opinion on this is confusing-don't mean it to be.

[ari333]

Did the husband say, "Her signaturelong blonde hair was cut off?" Maybe I'm paraphrasing, but it  was something to that effect. 

Interesting that in many photos she is looking at the camera and he is looking deeply at her or leaning his head on her with his eyes closed. And these didn't seem like candid shots. Not a crime. Just an observation.

This abduction and the injuries seemed like a personal thing to me.

The phone looked placed with the earbuds situated like that (imo)

[Medicine Crow]

Personally, I think there's more being NOT SAID that being SAID.  The husband seemed to be saying "I can tell you this & I can tell you that", but I'm not giving them any of my time until the WHOLE DAMN story is laid out!!  Just sayin'.

[ari333]

11 minutes ago, Medicine Crow said:

Personally, I think there's more being NOT SAID that being SAID.  The husband seemed to be saying "I can tell you this & I can tell you that", but I'm not giving them any of my time until the WHOLE DAMN story is laid out!!  Just sayin'.

I know, right?

Something feels off... something is missing from the story.

[UsernameFatigue]

My guess is that it is the police who are limiting what they want the husband to say. I read elsewhere that what was branded on her was a message, not a symbol. But the police will not divulge what the message is, or where it was branded. Maybe she was targeted - cheating and the wife/mother of the guy she was cheating with decided to teach her a lesson? I certainly don't think it was any kind of a hoax - the branding part is pretty OTT for carrying out something like that. And for what gain?

I did think it odd that everyone kept calling Sherri a "supermom". While I have no reason to think she isn't a wonderful mother, that phrase to me means a mother who works, often fulltime, while still managing to do for her kids what many SAHMs do. In Sherri's case she was a SAHM who also had daycare for her children so not what I would consider to be a "supermom".

Edited December 4, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[ari333]

6 minutes ago, UsernameFatigue said:

My guess is that it is the police who are limiting what they want the husband to say. I read elsewhere that what was branded on her was a message, not a symbol. But the police will not divulge what the message is, or where it was branded. Maybe she was targeted - cheating and the wife/mother of the guy she was cheating with decided to teach her a lesson? I certainly don't think it was any kind of a hoax - the branding part is pretty OTT for carrying out something like that. And for what gain?

I did think it odd that everyone kept calling Sherri a "supermom". While I have no reason to think she isn't a wonderful mother, that phrase to me means a mother who works, often fulltime, while still managing to do for her kids what many SAHMs do. In Sherri's case she was a SAHM who also had daycare for her children so not what I would consider to be a "super" mom.

BBM.

Good points on the whole post. I wondered the same about the bolded part too.

I don't want to assume or disparage anyone, but I wondered about a cheating scenario. I also considered if things were just a little too perfect and someone was jealous. It kind of reminded me of Kathie Lee Gifford who used to go on and on about her perfect life and finally someone set up her husband with a seduction that he didn't resist. It was humiliating and took her down a peg or 20.Kind of horrifying.  

This seemed so personal. And as mentioned, it wasn't likely a sex trafficking thing bc they wouldn't starve the victim and beat her, chop off the hair, and make her look undesirable if she were to be a commodity for sale. And for sure, wouldn't release her alive.

Something seems off, but I cant put my finger on what it is. Maybe there will be a follow up with more information.

[atlantaloves]

Yes, this case is very very strange, and her husband smiled way way way too much and was always crying when he wasn't smiling, but no tears? He was a little too into enjoying being on camera if you ask me, but what do I know, I'm just a true crime junkie.

[ari333]

11 minutes ago, atlantaloves said:

Yes, this case is very very strange, and her husband smiled way way way too much and was always crying when he wasn't smiling, but no tears? He was a little too into enjoying being on camera if you ask me, but what do I know, I'm just a true crime junkie.

Yes.The dude struck me as slightly  off somehow, but I cannot pinpoint on WHY I think he was off .It's puzzling to me.

[etexlady]

Odd case.  I'm surprised the husband passed a polygraph but he does seem to be a good actor.  Didn't I hear during the show that this family had made efforts to get their own reality show?  If this was a stunt to get publicity, they took it too far with the branding though it has not been told how she was "branded".

[ari333]

1 hour ago, etexlady said:

Odd case.  I'm surprised the husband passed a polygraph but he does seem to be a good actor.  Didn't I hear during the show that this family had made efforts to get their own reality show?  If this was a stunt to get publicity, they took it too far with the branding though it has not been told how she was "branded".

Odd indeed.

Do you guys recall the details about the anonymous ransom donor? Was that another oddity in your opinion?

And that C Gamble (was that his name?) guys seemed strange. He teaches folks how to escape hostage situations.... So many odd things.

Were we told if a ransom was paid?

[ari333]

The husband, KP, was on The Talk today or rather, some clips of him. . One of the hosts said that the story was "fishy." Also one host noted that it is odd that the public has not been enlisted to help find the perps. So little info.

[Court]

If my husband came home and I wasn't there, he wouldn't check a tracking device immediately. In fact, there is no tracking device at all. He would call/text me. Check the calendar maybe but that's about it. If too long passed, he'd call my mom. By too long, it would have to be hours such as past bedtime or something. It's weird. The story just rings false to me.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Court

[Madding crowd]

I think he was looking for her because her car was in the driveway and he wouldn't think she would go far with the kids (who he assumed were picked up). I find the story strange for a number of reasons including them moving out of their house. I'm sure they would have had police protection if they thought these women would come back. Since they let the wife go-why would they come back. 

[ari333]

But folks who routinely go far a jog from home don't take the car, so I don't find it weird that the car was there.  Plus why not atleast try to call her first before doing the tracking thing. ? Calling. That would be the first thing I'd do, but I'm not the last word on what to do.

Edited December 6, 2016 by ari333

[Madding crowd]

I thought he did call but I don't remember now. I think he expected her and the kids to be home when he got home. 

[ari333]

Did you guys see last night's eppy? That poor dude got railroaded and the other poor dude dropped dead from the stress before they could railroad him.

Who kills a person and hangs around a few yards away FISHING? You kill someone and get the hell out ..far away...fast. Sheesh. And the whole touch DNA was scary how easily it is passed around. Yikes.

[Jpxfactor]

Yes I saw it and feel the same.  To be convicted that easily with soo much doubt, is down right scary.

[ari333]

How they cherry picked the video of Carver describing  the girl's height made me angry. How horrible. They had the clips out of context. The man's IQ was 61..... *sigh* Bless his heart

[Soobs]

On 12/3/2016 at 8:29 PM, AngelinaMaria said:

I don't want to be inflammatory, but all of the many, many photos of her, her and her husband, her and her husband and her kids sure seemed to indicate that she was very proud of her looks and her "life".  It reeked a bit of "white privileged pride".  Who has that many professional photos of themselves?  And, she was absolutely picture perfect in every one.  It just didn't seem like a "real" life to me.  Hoax or not, I don't know but there are many, many red flags.

You are not wrong at all. One huge part of this story they left out is that she posted a lengthy story of being targeted for being white on a white supremacist blog. She wrote this story about how Latino girls in her high school had it in for her because of her German roots. Here's a link to an article about it.  http://www.ktvu.com/news/220715833-story.

Here's the text of the blog post. http://umbrellaofsuspicion.com/2016/11/is-racist-rant-a-motive-in-sherri-papini-abduction/

It was awhile ago (2003) but maybe she doesn't post under her real name anymore. I'm sure the husband and sister wouldn't have done the interviews if the show had included this important and kind of suspicious material. Maybe she was targeted for her racist views or maybe she watched one too many episodes of I Survived and had a victim fetish thing going. I don't think this is a straightforward kidnapping though. They already made 50k from donations.

[UsernameFatigue]

On December-10-16 at 9:52 AM, ari333 said:

Did you guys see last night's eppy? That poor dude got railroaded and the other poor dude dropped dead from the stress before they could railroad him.

Who kills a person and hangs around a few yards away FISHING? You kill someone and get the hell out ..far away...fast. Sheesh. And the whole touch DNA was scary how easily it is passed around. Yikes.

The thing I found odd about the claim that it was possible that the cops transferred Mark's DNA onto the car because they  shook his hand and handled his drivers license makes sense for Mark's DNA but not Neal's. Neal had left a half an hour before the boaters found the body, so he was not there to have the police come in contact with his DNA. Maybe there was something else at the scene where Mark was fishing that they touched that Neal touched but seems like that would be a lot of transferred DNA.

I wonder though since Neal left Mark if maybe he came across the girl and killed her? And that Mark's DNA got on the car through him, not the cops? In any case I think Mark had lousy representation and deserves another trial for that reason alone.

I have to say I did not understand Mark's claim that he could not have killed the girl because he has carpel tunnel syndrome. He then showed scars on his forearm from surgeries for it. But as far as I know carpel tunnel affects the hands and the surgery for it is on the hand, not the forearm. And if he had such a hard time using his hands for anything, how in the world does he hold a fishing rod, not to mention grab it and reel in a fish successfully? So if I were Mark and I got a new trial, I would not use that as part of my defense.

Edited December 12, 2016 by UsernameFatigue

[Zahdii]

7 hours ago, UsernameFatigue said:

I have to say I did not understand Mark's claim that he could not have killed the girl because he has carpel tunnel syndrome. He then showed scars on his forearm from surgeries for it. But as far as I know carpel tunnel affects the hands and the surgery for it is on the hand, not the forearm.

I didn't see last night's episode, so I can't comment on anything except the bit about carpel tunnel syndrome.  My father has had surgeries on both arms for this, and his scars start on the wrist and go up his forearms.  His hands work better and he has no more pain, but his grip is weaker now.  He can still hunt and fish, but he often has to use two hands when doing something that he used to do one handed.

[UsernameFatigue]

1 hour ago, Zahdii said:

I didn't see last night's episode, so I can't comment on anything except the bit about carpel tunnel syndrome.  My father has had surgeries on both arms for this, and his scars start on the wrist and go up his forearms.  His hands work better and he has no more pain, but his grip is weaker now.  He can still hunt and fish, but he often has to use two hands when doing something that he used to do one handed.

Thanks for posting that. I know several people who have had surgery for carpal tunnel and their scars are at the wrist and only a few inches long (l have a similar scar but on the side of my wrist for tendonitis) so have never heard of or seen incisions on the forearms for this. Ya learn something every day as the saying goes!

[jabinlbc]

Re: the Papini Case...  There are a number of things I found fishy as well.  If they are so private, and concerned about their safety now, why did they not block out their kids' faces in all the photos they showed?  Also, if she is a SAHM, and as I recalled, they stated he worked at Best Buy, how could they afford day care, what looked to be a nice large home, and a fairly comfortable lifestyle?  Something is definitely off with this story.

[Court]

Was this episode actually new? Or is it one of those that they repackage as new but only has maybe different narration?

I know I've seen this case before of the 3 kids abandoned by the same mom at different times. Or maybe my shows are running together...

 

Ok, I've definitely seen this episode before. Why does it say it's new? Grrr.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Court

[Wings]

On 12/17/2016 at 9:06 PM, Court said:

Was this episode actually new? Or is it one of those that they repackage as new but only has maybe different narration?

I know I've seen this case before of the 3 kids abandoned by the same mom at different times. Or maybe my shows are running together...

 

Ok, I've definitely seen this episode before. Why does it say it's new? Grrr.

Yes. I remember isolated scenes but somehow had forgotten who the mother was!

[Jpxfactor]

It was definitely a repeat.  They should have been up front with that.

[answerphone]

I remember seeing bits and pieces of it, but it's definitely a fascinating segment 

!

[hoosiermom]

Looks like tonight's episode is being discussed in the Leah remini-Scientology aftermath forum. See ya there.

[Maizie131]

1 hour ago, hoosiermom said:

Looks like tonight's episode is being discussed in the Leah remini-Scientology aftermath forum. See ya there.

C'mon over, hoosiermom!  I'm going to assume you're my neighbor -- I'm from Michigan & a fan of yours.  Let us know what you thought of 20/20 tonite! 

[Maharincess]

2 hours ago, hoosiermom said:

Looks like tonight's episode is being discussed in the Leah remini-Scientology aftermath forum. See ya there.

Thank you!

[Ina123]

http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/giovanni-ribisi-daughter-lucia-leaves-scientology/

This is a link to an article about the Ribisi's, a big Hollywood family in CO$. Most notable of them is Giovanni, the actor most will recognize as, Frank, Phoebe's brother on Friends. The article is about a female who is interviewed on a radio show by Tony Ortega as "Carole". "Carole" has been identified (presumed) as Giovanni's daughter, Lucia. It's fascinating. 

[Granimal]

On 12/11/2016 at 2:49 PM, Soobs said:

You are not wrong at all. One huge part of this story they left out is that she posted a lengthy story of being targeted for being white on a white supremacist blog. She wrote this story about how Latino girls in her high school had it in for her because of her German roots. Here's a link to an article about it.  http://www.ktvu.com/news/220715833-story.

Here's the text of the blog post. http://umbrellaofsuspicion.com/2016/11/is-racist-rant-a-motive-in-sherri-papini-abduction/

It was awhile ago (2003) but maybe she doesn't post under her real name anymore. I'm sure the husband and sister wouldn't have done the interviews if the show had included this important and kind of suspicious material. Maybe she was targeted for her racist views or maybe she watched one too many episodes of I Survived and had a victim fetish thing going. I don't think this is a straightforward kidnapping though. They already made 50k from donations.

Yes! I read this in People magazine of all places. According to People, Sherri (maiden name) posted some racist stuff to Facebook(?). Specifically mentioning attacks by Latina women. Fishy indeed. The People article also mentioned numerous times that they didn't know their neighbors and were very private (and didn't have much money.)

That article linked to above includes a quote from the husband, "our girl is home where she belongs." Interesting choice of words.

Edited January 30, 2017 by Granimal

[raiderred1]

The Nathan episode!  WTF!?!  Nothing added up. Nothing.  He has some bad luck. =o 

[valdawn]

I tried to watch that episode and just was kind of bored. Couldn't get into it and deleted it after 20 minutes. If seemed weird but him with his aspergers it's hard to know how to really take what and how he says things. I do know that I don't like any case where there's talk of how the person didn't act like they were supposed to in the situation. How is anybody "supposed" to act in any traumatic situation? People don't know until they've lived it. 

[Court]

It was a very odd show and not just because of Nathan. Nothing made sense.

[Lola16]

I am disgusted.

Quote

TONIGHT @Arobach talks with Leanna Taylor, ex-wife of Justin Harris, who was convicted of murdering their son in 2014. Only on #ABC2020

That woman got treated with kid gloves. No tough questions. Amy Robach even fed her the "right" answers by phrasing her questions with the answers. Kellyanne Conway could take notes.

This was no accident. Where the mention of the insurance policy? How Justin bought the kid breakfast? How the day care center reached out to him? Sloppy incomplete coverage. Did Leanna refuse to be interviewed if the questions were tough? This happened in 2014. So now in 2017, she's going to start to speak out.

Horrible people.

[Lola16]

They didn't ask her about:

June 13: Prosecutors say Justin Ross Harris, called Ross, searched websites that contained details on how children die in locked cars.

June 29, 2014: Search warrants released to the public reveal that both Ross and Leanna Harris had recently researched hot car deaths.

Day of

9:19 a.m. Ross and Cooper Harris leave the Chick-fil-A at Paces Ferry Road and Cumberland Drive, which is on the way to Harris’ job at Home Depot nearby. Surveillance cameras show Cooper to be “wide awake and happy.”  9:25 a.m.: Harris parks the SUV and goes in to work, leaving Cooper in the backseat.
--> Yet somehow Cooper falls asleep in less than 2 minutes and Ross leaves him in the car.

3:16 p.m.: Police say Harris texts his wife, “When are you going to get my buddy?”
(no mention of this. why would he ask his wife this question if the routine was she picked cooper up after work?)

[Lola16]

Or this

MAY 2014 (6 wks before 6/18/14) Cooper gets a new forward-facing big-boy car seat.
June 5, 2014 Although Cooper has been riding in his new car seat for ~4 weeks, Justin switches the car seat at this time, going back to using the too-small, rear-facing car seat Cooper will die in two weeks later, on June 18.

--> Why? This would be a good question. Seems obvious why he did it.

[Lola16]

This site has a good timeline http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?249213-Timeline-Background-June-18th-and-follow-up

[ari333]

Was the wife ever arrested or under suspicion? Imo she knew what was happening.

"What time are you picking up my buddy?" made me sick. As mentioned, there was no need to ask that. That poor child.

[irisheyes]

I've followed this case from the very beginning (I live a couple of counties over from Cobb). I can still remember the news report the very first evening when Cooper died, and even then it sounded a little fishy. After hearing every single detail about this case, I'm convinced he did it purposefully. I'm not as convinced she knew anything about it. I think she's just in denial that she could have been married to such a monster. 

[Christina]

Neither one ever researched hot car deaths. Never. The computer forensics proved it and Det. Stoddard admitted on the stand that he lied in the original search warrant. Someone sent JRH a Reddit link to a veterinarian's video about how you shouldn't leave animals in the cars even with the windows down. The computer forensic experts for the prosecution and defense both showed it was only watched once. He mentioned it during the interview at the police station, and Det. Stoddard called another officer and asked him to type of a search warrant that said he admitted to researching hot car deaths and children, which was not at all what he said, and then they leaked those warrants to the press at a time when it was still under seal, and Nancy Grace had a field day with it.

I watched the pre-trial hearings and the trial and believe that he did it intentionally. Det. Stoddard dug into Leanna Taylor with fervor, but couldn't find anything to link her to it. He had all the computers, cell phone records, etc. and there was never any discussing in those mediums between the two about this, and she had no idea that he was sexting women in the middle of the night while she was sleeping right next to him. I think their marriage was largely over and they were staying together out of their faith because of their son. There were two life insurance policies, one for $2000 through one of their employers and one for $25,000 that was added to the life insurance policies they had since they got married. At the time of the trial, they had not been paid because of the possibility of it being intentional, although a legal scholar had said on one of the news shows that they would probably have to eventually pay Leanna since she had not been charged, even if JRH was found guilty. They were not allowed to be mentioned in trial because the State could not prove that insurance was a factor. They weren't wealthy, but they weren't so bad off that $27,000 would make a difference in their lives. 

At the first pre-trial hearing, where Det. Stoddard was put on the hot seat about his "mis-worded" warrant, Leanna was in the audience and hearing for the first time that he had been sexting teenagers, and had actually had sex with some of them. She had no idea he would actually cheat on her, and thought it was just sexting and porn. I think her behavior was odd at all times the day Cooper died, and during the trial and this interview, but at that hearing when Det. Stoddard was talking about trying to contact the 15-year-old he was sexting, she was unable to control her facial expressions of shock and looked like she was about to get sick. Because she was under investigation, her attorney told her to stop communicating with the police, and JRH's brother (I think) had her almost convinced that it was just more lies from Det. Stoddard. Her attorney disabused her of that notion, and she eventually filed for divorce. I think she will not let herself believe it is true because it is so awful, but the evidence was pretty clear it was intentional. 

Personally, I don't think she was involved or knew it was going to happen; I just think she is weird. JRH wanted a new life with his teenage girlfriend and he couldn't do that if he was paying support for Cooper to Leanna. I don't think he has the capacity to feel anything but sympathy for himself. He is a true narcissist in every definition of the word. She didn't do herself any favors by doing this interview, though. She said she is planning on working as an advocate (or something) so that Cooper's death had a purpose. She just came across cold.

[Lola16]

Leanna says she sleeps in so Ross/Justin takes Cooper to daycare. But on that morning she leaves 1 hour before they do. 

RJH usually drops off Cooper at daycare from 8:30-9:15. Yet that day he gets into work much later. Then after 10am, she texts RJH to ask him if he got to work ok.  Well, why wouldn't he? Sunny day. No reason he wouldn't. Does she text him every day to make sure he gets to work OK? Doubt it. She's checking to make sure all is going according to plan.

3:15 he contacts her about going to a movie with friends. 4:04 she calls him and they talk for 1 minute. He leaves work and pulls over at 4:20 to "discover" Cooper.  He's on the phone the whole time. With whom? Phone records show he called Leanna and Home Depot.

She's expected at day care at 4:30. She shows up at 4:51, is told Cooper isn't there and her reaction is RJH must have left him in a hot car. Those are her words. No question to the employee of "Did RJH drop off Cooper today? Did someone pick him up?" Nope, straight to hot car.

She then has an employee accompany her to HD. She says she called RJH repeatedly but no answer. Was that proven? Does she call HD to ask for him? Get patched through to his desk? He should be at the movies. That's their story. So why doesn't she call his friends? Or head to the movies? Her demeanor is odd. Doesn't ask about her child. Asks about the husband.

When she sees him in interrogation, she hugs him. No tears on her part. Then asks him if he said too much.

They had just racked up a lot of credit card debt, had 2 car loans, and his outstanding student loans. He was passed over for promotion. 27K$ in insurance money would go a long way.

She said she wanted to go on 20/20 to change the narrative on Cooper's death and RJH.  She should have laid low and hoped people forgot about her.