I really think that people are forgetting that there is nothing and no one more suspicious than a police person. A Police person in a missing person case basically live ‘Trust No One’. They won’t believe anything just because someone says so. Unless and until they have proof of their own then it’s just something they have been told.Just throwing this out there ...
It would absolutely be possible to make it look as if your computer has been accessed from home at a certain time, via remote software. This could be accessed via another computer somewhere else, or even a phone. Don't forget too, that some phones have dual sim card capabilities. It'd be easy to buy a burner phone SIM, and use that to log into remote software on your phone, before discarding it somewhere.
Self medicating to try and black out the real reason Nicola is missing which isHe might still have been on medication and/or showing a trauma response during the interview, these two facts aren’t mutually exclusive.
Exactly. Given a partner is usually the first person to rule out in cases like this, the Police will have definitely analysed his alibi.I don’t think it does though, it relies also on the fact he was sending emails from his computer and working.
Also how on earth could he get all the way to Nicola without being picked up on a single CCTV camera or spotted by anyone along the way, kill her, and then get all the way back without being seen as well? It’s just not particularly plausible.
I didn’t at any point disagree with you, or say that your opinion wasn’t valid.Self medicating to try and black out the real reason Nicola is missing which is
HIM!!!
Possibly, but my point was in the response to your point saying 'why is it so difficult to believe that she's harmed herself'... (And I always say this in other threads...there's 'your truth, my truth and THE truth'.)I believe the family and friends have misled the media, possibly out of desperation because nobody in their shoes would want to admit the most likely outcome. Friends may not have even been aware of her personal problems or vulnerabilities.
I did notice this yesterday. This new information was brought by new posters to the thread. Possibly innocently carried over from FB though? I’m not on FB, it shits me. I did wonder was it being fed to us too though. Even so, the older stuff is still from his his accounts which were public, which is just asking to be found. Tik Tok, Pinterest, Linked In and Insta. That’s no oversight in my opinion. Especially for a computer engineer. Leads me to wonder, who is Curtis?I was confused as I wasnt online friday night so went for double checksie. Thread 12 its mentioned early in the evening that someone on fb has said that pauls pinterest and tiktok are open (who was that person on fb? someone called curt?) The night shift tattlers don scuba equipment and deep dive that shit pronto and find Paul seems to be an excessive fan of mammary glands of all ages. Saturday the lazy tattlers wake up and tell the night shift they are nuts but then deep dive that shit again. The affiliate page is also found that links through to the pinterest and thinkwithpaul.com quite clearly. The day shift start believing the night shift, we all start wondering if Paul knows we know and then.....poooooooof! pinterest gone. Then our tattler turns up to say they have told their mate who is the editor of the express. Editor phones Paul to check. Story goes in about trolls.
I think it can be summed up in one word.Genuinely not sure what the fuckety fuck to write in the recap.
I think I read that they (police and/or family) had reason to believe that someone was going to go to the press and divulge that very personal information so they were trying to get ahead of the game. I don't think they needed to expand on 'vulnerabilities' but I'm not the police. They have been heavily criticized for this too.Possibly, but my point was in the response to your point saying 'why is it so difficult to believe that she's harmed herself'...
My point is, even in denial, why would they risk putting a vulnerable person in an even more vulnerable position by whipping up a frenzy. Surely, the police would have recommended to Paul that a channel 5 interview would be detrimental.
Regardless of whether she's harmed herself or ran away, Nicola has lost alot of her dignity and someone has to be accountable for that.
I wonder if their relationship was breaking to the point of potentially separation, and he's kind of... indifferent to her disappearance? Sounds horrible but it would explain why he feels angry instead of upset, because he doesn't have feelings for her anymore. It's not something he'd admit for obvious reasons.I don’t know, I just can’t shake the feeling he is somewhat responsible.
I'd open with that. Sums it up wellGenuinely not sure what the fuckety fuck to write in the recap.
I know that but that was AFTER the channel 5 interview. And the only reason it was going to leak was because of the media interest.I think I read that they (police and/or family) had reason to believe that someone was going to go to the press and divulge that very personal information so they were trying to get ahead of the game. I don't think they needed to expand on 'vulnerabilities' but I'm not the police. They have been heavily criticized for this too.
I totally agree!! I think she's vulnerable because of him not because she's some raging alcoholic going through the menopause.I can’t shake the feeling that he’s worn her down, made her self esteem so low with his pervy ways, gaslighted her in to genuinely believing she had a drinking problem, probably convinced her she will lose her the kids if she leaves him and she couldn’t see any other way out.
I hope she’s out there somewhere to tell her side of the story one day, but I don’t think she is.
I don't think the police believe she is alive. Hence, their working hypothesis.I know that but that was AFTER the channel 5 interview. And the only reason it was going to leak was because of the media interest.
There's being in denial about someone's vulnerabilities and there's whipping up a frenzy.
The police have been dealing with missing people and mental health issues for years, so why was this case any different?
Its common sense (for police) to say 'Dont do the interview, because if she is alive, this scrutiny could push her further'...
---
I totally agree!! I think she's vulnerable because of him not because she's some raging alcoholic going through the menopause.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?