Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys she's not a missing hiker. The discussion is useful for hiker safety but is not applicable here.

How do you know she's not a missing hiker? Everyone is speculating at best, but there is not proof she wasn't out hiking just as there is not any proof she was abducted.

Ok. Anyone with a background in law/criminal investigation is aware what this is. It's not a missing hiker. You can continue to believe it, but it isn't.

Well, the news is saying this is not a criminal investigation, so she is not a missing abducted murdered dead person, either. She's more a missing hiker than anything at this point.

"The family of missing Fairfax County firefighter Nicole Mittendorff says they have not been able to gain access to her cellphone data, which they say could help in the ongoing search, because there is no criminal investigation."

http://wtop.com/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The car in question was seen driving into the park by an elderly woman the same day it was found. She remembered the car because of its uniqueness. Meaning the car was parked there the same day it was found. I still think foul play.

This is so so obvious. The police know it too.

That doesn't make any sense - why would an elderly woman be driving the missing girl's car, and (assuming that's even true) why would she leave it there?

This is why grammar matters. It was seen by an elderly woman being driven in. Not seen being driven in by an elderly woman.

Yeah, I guess I should've re-read it before posting, to make sure everyone could understand what I meant; though I figured the sentence after it would clear up any confusion. However, if we're being grammar Nazis- your sentence doesn't really work well, either. Makes it sound like someone is driving the elderly woman in.

Basically, what happened was the old lady saw the uniquely styled car while driving her own car into the park. She said something about it, and was told to contact VSP to give them the info. However, if her soon to be ex husband works for them.. well who knows what could happen with this case.

Also, to the people who couldn't see him doing such a thing- there have been serial killers with such charm and charisma, that friends and relatives were shocked upon finding out what they had done. You just never really know people anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys she's not a missing hiker. The discussion is useful for hiker safety but is not applicable here.

How do you know she's not a missing hiker? Everyone is speculating at best, but there is not proof she wasn't out hiking just as there is not any proof she was abducted.

Ok. Anyone with a background in law/criminal investigation is aware what this is. It's not a missing hiker. You can continue to believe it, but it isn't.

Well, the news is saying this is not a criminal investigation, so she is not a missing abducted murdered dead person, either. She's more a missing hiker than anything at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really curious as to what killer viruses PP thinks are lurking in the Virginia woods.

LOL

Zika

Zika kills people before they have time to walk out of the woods now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm really curious as to what killer viruses PP thinks are lurking in the Virginia woods.

LOL

Zika

Anonymous wrote:And it's troubling that anyone cold enter last week without payment. You could just walk or drive in.

Why is that troubling? I don't think NPS normally charges people so they can have records of attendance in case of a murder investigation. It's the Centennial of NPS so parks are free to celebrate. Nothing troubling about it.

The car is not there for any good reason but that is not the fault of NPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys she's not a missing hiker. The discussion is useful for hiker safety but is not applicable here.

How do you know she's not a missing hiker? Everyone is speculating at best, but there is not proof she wasn't out hiking just as there is not any proof she was abducted.

Ok. Anyone with a background in law/criminal investigation is aware what this is. It's not a missing hiker. You can continue to believe it, but it isn't.

If not, then why are authorities searching the woods?

Because if a person harmed her and dumped her car at a national park, it's possible they also dumped her body at the park.

Anonymous wrote:I'm really curious as to what killer viruses PP thinks are lurking in the Virginia woods.

LOL

So, she is probably dead, right?

I'm really curious as to what killer viruses PP thinks are lurking in the Virginia woods.

And it's troubling that anyone cold enter last week without payment. You could just walk or drive in.

Anonymous wrote:The murders occurred more like 20 years ago, not 5-10.

Ok. I'm getting old time flies.

Anonymous wrote:They can print the car to see if she drove it to where it's parked. They can search credit card records at the gift shops to find out which trail guides she used, thus narrowing down her initial entry and subsequent suggested paths based on where the car was parked. The fact that she has not been found yet is what's so troubling. Leads one to wonder if she didn't Park the car.

+1

They can print the car to see if she drove it to where it's parked. They can search credit card records at the gift shops to find out which trail guides she used, thus narrowing down her initial entry and subsequent suggested paths based on where the car was parked. The fact that she has not been found yet is what's so troubling. Leads one to wonder if she didn't Park the car.

The murders occurred more like 20 years ago, not 5-10.