Nope not you, they are all easily identifiable by only being "Member" and having no profile image. Neither of which you meet.
"delta ops"? Is everyone at LBT Global about 8 years old? Do they think they're in the SAS or something?
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
The
I get red flags if I see someone pushing their partner to "expand their boundaries".
Esther did tell the world he was always "pushing her" to go further than she thought she could manage. (Her Facebook posts)
The boundaries part? The rest for me is him virtue signalling.
I get red flags if I see someone pushing their partner to "expand their boundaries".
Esther did tell the world he was always "pushing her" to go further than she thought she could manage. (Her Facebook posts)
Yes I am Dan trying to make you all think I did it!
To me it reads as his truth, the whole thing. Each chapter represents something significant, it can be translated thanks to his obsessively organised mind. But yes that boundaries part is the worst. Also how he hopes she comes back safely, as in not alive but safely for him.
Not all. Some like Broccoli & several others have very interesting insights.
To be fair, I've been a member for a while and used to post on the FoD threads, but I lost interest in all that kind of nonsense and only post/read this thread now. I was originally on the Websleuths thread, but there is too much moderation/judgement from fellow posters on there, and this is the most frank discussion on the internet about this case. So I can see why people have been drawn to Tattle specifically for this thread.
LOL, if you mean like me - then I found this thread googling the story, which interests me as I've spent time in mountainous terrain.
Here's a link to the document:
The more Dan + LB Trust push the ‘French police/searchers incompetence’ angle to explain why her body + belongings were not found sooner by them, the more determined the French investigators will be to provide a definitive answer.
My instinct is that it will be undetermined (or most likely an accident) - given the subtleties between falling and being pushed and otherwise lack of circumstantial evidence. (Thinking of the complexities of The Staircase case and that was in a house with the crime scene secured relatively early). Unless there is some sort of smoking gun level of reveal in the forensics. Caroline Crouch’s death would always have seemed suspicious but it was the phone/smart watch data that ultimately tripped up Babis Anagnostopoulos, in contrast I doubt Esther’s phone will yield anything and burner phones and sims are easy to ditch.
I can only go by a few videos I have seen of Dan (both before and after Esther’s disappearance), from those he isn’t someone I’d want near my girlfriends/sisters/nieces. Does that make him a murderer? No of course not but he still sets my alarm bells off. I wonder if anyone felt the same about Ian Stewart after his first wife died. (It wasn’t until Ian was convicted of murdering his second wife, wealthy author Helen Bailey, that his first wife’s death was re-examined and he was charged - now facing trial).
My instinct is that it will be undetermined (or most likely an accident) - given the subtleties between falling and being pushed and otherwise lack of circumstantial evidence. (Thinking of the complexities of The Staircase case and that was in a house with the crime scene secured relatively early). Unless there is some sort of smoking gun level of reveal in the forensics. Caroline Crouch’s death would always have seemed suspicious but it was the phone/smart watch data that ultimately tripped up Babis Anagnostopoulos, in contrast I doubt Esther’s phone will yield anything and burner phones and sims are easy to ditch.
I can only go by a few videos I have seen of Dan (both before and after Esther’s disappearance), from those he isn’t someone I’d want near my girlfriends/sisters/nieces. Does that make him a murderer? No of course not but he still sets my alarm bells off. I wonder if anyone felt the same about Ian Stewart after his first wife died. (It wasn’t until Ian was convicted of murdering his second wife, wealthy author Helen Bailey, that his first wife’s death was re-examined and he was charged - now facing trial).
By acting the part of someone who loved her he gets to look good & sell more books.
It's quite cold really. There's nothing truly warm & fuzzy there.
I only comment on this thread & I'm new to this site. I came here because I was so frustrated at the Dan fawning that's going on over on Websleuths. I had been following the case over there for months until someone there mentioned this site. Then I moved here. I don't agree with a lot of what's said here, but that's ok, at least you CAN share different opinions here and that's the key. You're not allowed to even mention Dan's suspicious behaviour or his anomalies over there, yet ALL of it forms the story. You can't just cherry pick parts of the story and leave out the rest because it's "victim blaming". Dan had a massive part in this too, whether he was directly involved or not, as he is the one providing the information. The sheer fact he had them concentrating their search in the wrong area (whether by accident or by design) in and of itself could have cost her her life. What if she was laying there alive for a few days with broken legs? He also didn't call for help soon enough. Again, oversight or by design? Then you have him finding the body when the search teams searched that area twice. Another massive red flag. If these points cannot be discussed, then what is the point as you are discussing half a case? And that's before we even mention any of the other red flags. I'm fed up with Websleuths and how they fawn all over these partners. They were fawning all over Caroline Crouch's husband as well, and we all know what happened there. I get that allowing discussion of partners can get very nasty when maybe they are totally innocent, I get the sensationalism. But more often than not it IS a family member, so there's a fine line. My personal opinion on this case is this - I don't know. It could easily have been both - an accident or foul play. We don't have enough information. We don't even know where exactly she fell. We don't know why her phone didn't ping anymore. We don't know if she died later on the 22nd or if it was the next day. If it was the next day, we don't know where she slept that night. We don't know why she was up a mountain that seems impossible to climb (IF indeed that was where she was, which we don't even know). We literally know nothing. What we DO know is that Dan has acted suspiciously since the get-go, and all of that forms a part of this story, whether he was directly involved or not. That's my two cents for what it's worth.
Last edited:
As I've said before, I still think he is responsible but I think he will 'get away with it' as it will be impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt. He would know that any blood near him would lead forensics to him so I think he pushed her but how on earth would you prove that unless you can put him at the scene?
SvenS, I have very much appreciated your comments on here. Because I straddle between the two theories, and a lot of what you have written re the accident theory makes sense to me. Plus you helped me get clearer in my mind that she probably went West and never did go East. Maybe she always went West and could possibly have had the accident that night.
That’s so bizarre. Clearly the victim here is Esther since she is the one who is dead.
Don’t shoot me but I’ve got a whole new theory ….. so we’re all agreed he seems to be a bit less well off than she was so what if he cooks up a scheme whereby she goes missing in the mountains, media gets involved, everyone looks for her and then he miraculously finds her. They then write a book and make a fortune but somewhere along the way it all goes a bit wrong and she ends up in an accident. Hence why he was able to eventually find her (he knew the path she’d take) and that’s why he is dodgy as buggery!
Yes it's terrible. And worse still, the fawning is dreadful. Poor Dan this, poor Dan that. Nobody dares mention all his red flags. All of which led to Esther only being found now. It's like gaslighting tbh. I understand the website don't want to point fingers at family members until the police say so, but in this case the police have said numerous times they are not ruling out foul play.
Did you notice the list of 18 missing items? They're all things that she'd have been wearing eg thick jackets or holding close to her body eg hiking sticks.
Blood spatter surfaces he'd have to get rid of.
Inclines me to believe blood was involved. Why else would the killer remove 18 items?
I'm putting all my hopes in forensics & info they have that we don't have.
They have spent a lot of $$ so far and stated forensics will take 1 month. They had to justify that expenditure to their bosses & pull a senior guy in on top of all that.
Fingers crossed.
Last edited:
Yes exactly.
Paragraphs as I see them-
1. "Best person" for supply
2. Her status and worth. What he saw in her, intrigued by her morality (opposite to him).
3. Why the relationship ended and he went off her
4. All about the murder, his motive and thoughts since. It made him "happier than he can describe".
5. His doubts about swapping his futures. Will he be caught?
6. "I try to hold on to the hope I will get away with it"
7. "My anxiety is off the chart, so if you saw me working outdoors, hunting, walking, hiking or cycling, please tell the police so I can be put out of my misery, but no one did see me because I am so clever"
Hang on, that sounds like me. I’ve been following the case for a while because I instantly thought it was the boyfriend but I wasn’t sure on voicing my opinions out loud! I’m definitely not from LBT though
The list of missing items got my attention this morning.
18 things! I'd thought it was just a tent.
No way animals took all that. What for?
Metal sticks.
Jackets.
Items in proximity to her body.
1. If he only pushed her or only scared her into stepping off a cliff (she did not fall anyway IMO ) there is no need to remove evidence.
2. If he smashed her skull he does. And we have a cracked skull.
What the FBI call "leakage".
You're incredibly good at detecting it. Gobsmacked.
18 things! I'd thought it was just a tent.
No way animals took all that. What for?
Metal sticks.
Jackets.
Items in proximity to her body.
1. If he only pushed her or only scared her into stepping off a cliff (she did not fall anyway IMO ) there is no need to remove evidence.
2. If he smashed her skull he does. And we have a cracked skull.
It took me a minute but now I see.
What the FBI call "leakage".
You're incredibly good at detecting it. Gobsmacked.
Last edited:
Did the police ask for volunteers that were used to climbing the area to advise them on spots of interest? I still find it odd that she was hidden away in a cave that police has previously missed yet he found her.
I thought this yesterday when I watched him talking about seeing the mountain rescue teams. It was like he saw the opportunity there, knew people would go looking, just after the BBC piece about their travels…
Either he coerced her into ‘disappearing’ and she had an accident, or something happened and she wanted to call it off, they argued, he was close by and then something happened.
- Status