Missing Blogger Esther Dingley #2

[LittleMissBlueSky]

That's a fair statement, the problem is if someone repeatedly calls you a liar and it's not true then it is difficult not to respond and you end up in a vicious spiral, however, I will stop responding to her continual attacks now as I think I have made my point.

Let me be clear that I'm not calling you a liar. I think you're saying something that hasn't been shown to be true, because it fits a story that you want to believe. That's not quite the same thing!

 

[reCAPTCHA]

Interesting that the BBC piece came out on the day she went missing. I was thinking the opposite to others in that maybe the article filled her with confidence, maybe too much and she took a risk she wouldn’t normally take in regard to her route/climb that day. It might have made her feel a bit cocksure maybe-uncharacteristically hubristic? Just a random musing on my part....

 

[LittleMissBlueSky]

He is saying that other than a very small area when it came to phone signal he didn't find what he expected, they are talking about France and Spain - the question is WHY he was expecting poor signal so often when it is not in fact the case - that's where the speculation comes in.

=======================================
"Police in Spain and France have launched an investigation into her disappearance and initial suggestions the area has a poor phone signal have been ruled out because of the mast.

Earlier this week Dan, 38, himself revealed communications were good.

He told BBC Breakfast :''Now I’ve since been in the area and found that the signal is actually quite good in a lot of the places she might have been... if she had had an accident and that was the reason she couldn’t have been in touch it must have been in a very very small area indeed."
========================================

Ah! The Sun!

"Initial suggestions the area has a poor phone signal have been ruled out because of the mast" is nonsense. In mountainous areas its quite possible for whole valleys to lack signal, even close to a transmitter site. Dan's dossier is very clear that there's no signal at all immediately below the peak on the French side until a point well below the refuge.

The second part (BBC Breakfast) is talking about her expected onward route from the Peak de Sauvegard into France. The "very small area" refers to the path from the peak down to the refuge de venasque where she was expected to spend the night.

Sun journalists aren't big on context!

 

[Cheapseats]

I've seen her statement reported in various different ways by various different media outlets. That's why I take it with a pinch of salt. When it was first printed it was more a comment that they were hoping to reunite soon but were not sure when. It then appeared to be embellished with extra details added on. Therefore I personally have never been sure exactly which part was factual and which was embroidered by media.

The police comments about their relationship not being what it seemed or something were interesting but they were never really elaborated on so it makes it easy to fill in the blanks, potentially erroneously (or not, of course).

I'm not sure if their actual relationship was dysfunctional. From the posts I read at the time (their blog and her Facebook) I thought it seemed more that they had both been through a lot and were struggling to find happiness in themselves rather than within the relationship itself. I got the impression that whilst being in each other's company 24/7 could be challenging (it would be for anyone), that they enjoyed individual pursuits to give them the space needed. I view that as being a sensible and mature thing to do, not something that's a red flag. I feel a lot of things he says/does could be percieved in two ways, one negative, one more positive.

However even if they were likely to separate, I find the leap from him talking over her in a video meaning he's absolutely being controlling in their relationship and had bugged her phone and controlled what she ate, a stretch too far. There is no solid evidence for that at all.

There's a lot of assumptions and judgements being made about someone from what is realistically a very limited amount of knowledge (although to be fair the same could be said for the majority of cases similar to this). He's spent the best part of a year not knowing what happened to his long term partner but realising she was probably dead. Even if things had been difficult between them it's still an enormous loss for someone to cope with. I think some of the way he has conducted himself could be considered unusual but he's likely to not really be thinking straight.

It is of course only my opinion

Who said bugging her phone ? He may have put the software on with her full knowledge and consent. My windows PC has a remote desktop facility which I have turned off but it's useful kit sometimes and not necessarily used for bad purpose. I dont think Microsoft have put on remote desktop capability for bad purposes but I accept that I wouldn't trust everyone to have remote access to my pc

 

[LittleMissBlueSky]

No, I am being honest, he thought there would be a lot less signal than there was, how he came to that belief is the interesting point, it didn’t come out of thin air, do you seriously think that if it came from Ms. Dingley he would say so?

He thought there would be a lot less signal than there was in a specific area because Esther had said she was in an area with bad signal. She was. The Spanish side has no signal except for the Peak. The French side has no signal until a point about half an hour's walk below the refuge where she was expected to spend the night. There is absolutely no evidence that Esther had claimed a poor signal on other occasions in order to fob him off, or that that was happening on this occasion. So when you said "We know from Mr. Colegate that the claims of a bad signal were often not true ..." you were saying something that wasn't true. You made it up!

That's important because Esther can't tell her own story. If you think you can tell her story for her, you should tell the truth about what you know.

 

[LittleMissBlueSky]

I wasn’t talking specifically about the end of the trip, I meant generally, because of the battery and her statements on the reception SHE was controlling when they talked, NOT HIM

So please provide sources for your claim that "We know from Mr. Colegate that the claims of a bad signal were often not true because he was surprised when he got up there that there was in fact no problem most of the time." My bold.

 

[AlanB]

So please provide sources for your claim that "We know from Mr. Colegate that the claims of a bad signal were often not true because he was surprised when he got up there that there was in fact no problem most of the time." My bold.

If you’re saying that the part “claims of a bad signal” is not provable I accept that is true, but frankly this is pretty pointless - maybe “expectation” is a word you would be happy with - but the question is WHY he would expect that ?

 

[The_Investigator]

Agree

Completely agree @Agent Krycek.

After 10 months of critically analyzing all the documented data available to the public, I reached the same conclusion a while ago.

LE sure is taking a long time to resolve their investigative forensics - that may be telling.

I will go back to my state of suspension on this case until there is new evidence or LE findings. WS discussion on this case is guarded by rabid dogs. And Tattle discussion on this case is rife with petty bickering. So I'll just keep my ideas private.

Agree with you @MorningDove. Got a bit tired of this now, karma will out,… 🥸 and we can be rest assured we did our best to get to the bottom of it. And have.

 

[LittleMissBlueSky]

Wow, that's TRULY DESPERATE...

Says the Sun reader.

You are trying to obfuscate by wanting to make it about specific times and places that suit your attack - which is not what he says in the statement, but regardless, that is not what I stated either so it's moot....

No, I'm putting back the context The Sun has left out.

EDIT: This is what I said (you shortened it to make it appear more definitive and aid your argument) :

No, I shortened it to make it shorter!

" We know from Mr. Colegate that the claims of a bad signal were often not true because he was surprised when he got up there that there was in fact no problem most of the time."

That statement is factually accurate.

No it isn't! We know from Mr. Colegate that his assumptions about the phone signal on Esther's assumed onward path were false, and that's the context in which his remarks were made.

 

[AlanB]

AlanB I am quite perplexed by you! You have joined tattle recently and have only contributed to this thread, which makes me think that you joined the site for the main purpose of commenting on this thread (no problem there, all are welcome!). However I am aware that there has been policing of comments in regards to this case on other Internet forums, so I do wonder if you have come here from those (WS).

you seem to agree with the explanation that it was unlikely that DC crept across the mountains and murdered her in cold blood, yet he doesn’t seem entirely innocent in your eyes. Which is fair, given all the theories being thrown around.

I guess my other point is that you seem to be quite keen to disregard other people’s information “without a source” when you have yourself commented or made an opinion on things without an actual source…

Regardless, this is clearly a complex case with a large public interest. As much as I agree with you in terms of DC being involved, I think it is only fair to request “a reliable source” if you are also able to back up your information with one too.

I once again reiterate that it has categorically been proven than Dan would be logistically unable to murder Esther without hiring help or a hitman; and I believe that it is disrespectful to the entire family to continue to pursue the idea that Dan is a stone cold murderer.

Your post in response is even more perplexing to me ! You put within your post to me comments about how disrespectful it is to suggest Mr. Colegate murdered Ms. Dingley as though somehow this is related to me, when I am saying the opposite, even if I agreed with that position (which I don't) frankly I have to say that's classic straw-manning.

Again, I think it is extremely unlikely that Mr. Colegate is responsible, although I think your opinion that it has categorically been proved he couldn't is incorrect, nor do I think it disrespectful for others of a different opinion to say as much.

I have not been posting on WS, I came here because I thought that this case was it extraordinary and it seemed that Tattle was a believer in freedom of speech, unlike WS. I am interested in the sources for information and speculation, I think anything that might get us nearer the truth is good and both speculation and citing sources is good in my view. I don't have a problem with my own statements being questioned and have explained my position when asked, others may not like what I have said that but that's fine, I don't mind.
I haven't disregarded anybody's information as you suggest, that doesn't mean I agree with all of it and that is my right - we all have an opinion.

I don't have a "side to fight on" and prove "MY" position, which seems to be how so many posters on here operate - that is in my view childish...

 

[MourningDove]

I have a brother who has it. V wealthy v grandiose. Aston Martins, yacht, 2 vineyards, several homes. Vengeful. Mega rage-filled when wounded.

Ultra charming. All round achiever: business, women, sporting activities. V good looking.

Incredibly weak emotionally during a narcissist collapse. If a woman leaves (rare). Abuses alcohol to the brim of death (two vineyards, no need to buy any). Self pity galore.

I was terrified he'd commit suicide in 2019. It was that bad. They feel major pain. Agony. I heard it all. As Tudor says, never believe anyone who tells you narcs don't have feelings.

He described feeling a deep void inside. And terror.

I wouldn't be out looking at this stage (I.. e. After 8 months) as the chances of finding them alive would be next to zero. But ,if say i was... what would i do when i thought i had sighted the site of the body? Would a person get closer to check facts or would a person stay away?. Interested in what people think in terms of the psychology behind it

Respectfully shortened.

That is a very interesting question, @Estella. I am biased as it pertains to DC in this case because my mind has spent a lot of time analyzing whether he could have manipulated ED's remains (from early on) to appear as an accident instead of the suicide I believe may have occurred, and eventually found. But let's say that didn't happen, which is equally possible. I honestly think a long term partner who found the skeletal remains of someone he/she loved deeply would do anything reasonably possible to be present or closer to that location, especially after longing for that moment so long.

 

[SummerSky]

To my mind there are too many coincidences here for there not to be something in it:

1. The rescue helicopter video where the rescuers were doing exactly what happened to Esther a few months later (premeditated?).
2. Esther writing "I think I can see you" (could she see him?).
3. The BBC article comes out the same day she disappears.
4. Dan waits 3 days to alert authorities.
5. Dan's BBC interview where he says he "loved" her.
6. Dan goes off searching on his own, leads them the wrong direction (deliberately?).
7. Dan hiring LBT to control the narrative, rubbishing claims they were "on a break".
8. The bone fragment appearing literally out of nowhere (deliberately placed?).
9. Dan magically finding the body when the search teams couldn't, even with all their special equipment and helicopters etc.
10. The missing items and tent.
11. Dan now fund raising.

Great list of flaming red flags. Wish we could pin it to the top of the thread so it shows on each new page.

12. Tracking dogs found no scent of her beyond Pic de Sauvegarde yet she was found in a different area.

13. No vultures sighted by mountain rangers from 22-25 November? and beyond. Presuming rangers continued duties & daily walks 22-25 Nov?

 

[LittleMissBlueSky]

"I think she was fobbing him off" is fine. No quarrel with that.

"We know from Mr. Colegate that the claims of a bad signal were often not true" is nonsense. We know no such thing. You made it up.

 

[SummerSky]

Little research? I've laid facts out clearly.

If you have a problem with my posts, feel free to report them.

Edited to add: this poster has diagnosed Dan Colegate as a narcissist, a "100% women hater", and much more besides; they have claimed that a poem with the word "stains" in it written months BEFORE Esther went missing indicates that her body was wrapped in a tent and carted off the mountain; and they accuse other people of posting without doing research. Hilarious.

You are very confused.

I wrote no post about the "poem with the word "stains" in it..."

 

[AlanB]

...
In contrast to Laura Adomaityte's statement, we have the words of Esther's aunt, speaking on behalf of her father, who said Esther had phoned her dad to tell him she would soon be going home to Dan; we have the words of Esther's long-term close friend Phil Ash, who said she told him the same;
...

This is very interesting, can you link to the source for these statements please.

 

[SummerSky]

Many relationships are troubled. Very very very few end in murder. I came to dislike my ex-husband, and we separated. He has since died, of entirely natural causes - does our history make me a suspect in his death?! I do believe both Dan and Esther were troubled; after all, she wanted to continue their nomadic life rather than return to a more settled existence, and perhaps even some regular employment? I think she had difficulties not necessarily related to Dan, and on her last hike she did not behave or prepare like a reasonable adult. I have read comments that she mistook her fitness for experience - I'll try to find a link for these!

The gaslighting is coming from people who seriously think forensic investigators would be fooled by a body killed (inside a tent, according to some posters) and taken elsewhere for months, then the remains taken to a mountainous area and distributed in an inaccessible spot, with most of Esther's belongings scattered nearby. Like, what?!

Lol we need the Cold Case Foundation to pay you a visit about your dead ex.

PS. But before you start packing for the airport this is just a joke.

Once again, try not to assume you know more than the police. They said it was troubled.

 

[TiaanG]

All these poems were before her death, I.e. his last post was May 2020, so the 'beating' word couldnt be referring to her death surely?


This one also particularly stands out. It is almost as if he could be writing from Esther's perspective...

Oops my bad, sorry, thought that said May 2021 and not 2020.

 

[Steve Cree Fan Too]

I think you have to read between the lines in their statements. They were quite forward in emphasizing how the bones just kinda magically appeared when they weren't there before.

That was in reference to the skull fragment not the rest of the remains that were being discussed above, and I don't think there was any official statement about magic being involved, just that it probably hadn't been there a long time being as it was found near a popular path. I think you have to read the lines, not in between.

Could you point me to articles that suggest more of her equipment has been found subsequent to the first discovery? I haven't seen any.

That's because there aren't any.

 

[colouredlines]

The second link for Phil Ash is behind a paywall, can you cut and paste it here, thanks.

Archive here: https://archive.ph/saBLq

 

[BestWishes]

Take us through your thinking a bit more so we can understand.

What about this strikes you as too difficult?



The tent would mean life or death on a cold wet night if one had to camp. If she didn't take it she would appear reckless/mad.

It's a major clue because it's missing.

It's an inconvenience to the narrative being spread by LBT etc.

Not sure where the 1 sheet of fabric comes in? The Lanshun specs are on the thread. The fabric is lined and reinforced with silicon and aluminium.

No matter any advertising blurb, the tent would be made of nylon with silicone coating bonded to it. All that means is “thin”. There’s no “lining”. 1 layer. A tent for any kind of weather in the mountains would have an entire additional layer of a different fabric. The alum is for poles. That shape blows flat in wind, which is why good tents don’t look like that. It is missing many features of a proper tent. It is not at all a life or death tent. It’s also much too cheap for a good tent. A proper tent for camping out in the mountains above tree line would be at least £250-£300.
The tent choice shows lack of experience. Same with the flimsy shoes.