8/26 - 10/12

[need2no]

Is all this fuss about "leaves toast in toaster"???? :unsure:

FUSS?

I thought we were having an adult discussion about the events in this missing person case. I was interested in other's thoughts about some of what was stated on the missing person poster.

For me it's not any one thing Christine did, or didn't do. Some things can be dismissed for one reason or the other. It's when you put it all together the hinky meter just won't stop buzzing.

[Casspian]

FUSS?

I thought we were having an adult discussion about the events in this missing person case. I was interested in other's thoughts about some of what was stated on the missing person poster.

For me it's not any one thing Christine did, or didn't do. Some things can be dismissed for one reason or the other. It's when you put it all together the hinky meter just won't stop buzzing.

Geez.. I was just asking :confused:

[Casspian]

Interesting thoughts about the church, thanks for posting them. I also wanted to thank you for your other posts on this board too, you are a refreshing and interesting new voice here, with some interesting ideas, I for one would be glad to read any of your ideas and thoughts, should you feel like posting them.

Many Blessings
(and back to lurking mode for now)

Oops, I misstated something about the church... I think the rule is that if he was caught doing something they considered a sin or bad or whatever, then he would not be allowed to resign. Therefore people theorized he quit before that happened, i.e., someone found out something he was doing

[need2no]

I think that was written up around the time she may have been finding the secret life. I can't tell the exact day but it just seems like that was after. If at the time it went up she thought he was more likely alive then dead then that would make much more sense. Some people speculated that it was written more at him then about him.

I'm just going by my memory of when this missing person poster was created and posted. But admittedly it has been a long time, so I'd have to research to be certain when it came out.

I would agree SD, those 2 comments were personal and seemed to be something only Nicholas would understand. So it would seem they were directed at him, or as a dig at him, obviously they weren't added to help in locating Nicholas. Therefore I suppose it would stand to reason she thought he was alive when she wrote that, unless she was just being snarky for the heck of it, or out of sheer anger at the situation.

Strange though, from the get go she seemed convinced something nefarious had happened to him.

[Musterion]

For further consideration - people do not usually change their habits for long. Even if he could not walk into a large advertising firm and display his portfolio, I would think he would be doing something related to art and design if he is alive.

I believe that, too, Rainy.

Nicholas had a distinct style. Almost impossible to change how an artist sees things.

IMO.
M.

[SeattleEddie]

I made a mistake. I meant to say libels Nicholas, not slanders. I was thinking of that moronic statement "slanderous tunnelvision" which still makes me laugh. If only it weren't so tragic.

And BTW, talking about Christine is boring IMO. Her inconsistencies are interesting only insofar as they may lead to an understanding of what happened to Nicholas.

In general and on another topic, delving into pathological behaviour is like making your way through a dark maze of confusion.

[Musterion]

Can you say exactly what pablum you are talking about and what is definitely not true or inaccurate? This is some verification I found of what I have posted...



http://helpfindthemissing.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2562&page=40


I am h ere to learn and I also think the church could be a good avenue to look closer. I don't want to get into knocking churches, but they are certainly not all the same and the minister seems to be somewhat of a rising star or something.

Harlett posted that Nicholas had been identified as stevenspazz through Christine.

Many believe since that information came from Christine it is suspect.

IMO.
M.

[Musterion]

FUSS?

I thought we were having an adult discussion about the events in this missing person case. I was interested in other's thoughts about some of what was stated on the missing person poster.

For me it's not any one thing Christine did, or didn't do. Some things can be dismissed for one reason or the other. It's when you put it all together the hinky meter just won't stop buzzing.

Bolding Mine.

For me, too. It isn't one thing. It is the context of everything.

I don't know if Christine had anything to do with his disappearance or not, but I do believe, moreso all the time, that she knows something.

IMO.
M.

[MystryPhobia]

Actually, no it isn't. It just goes to prove that anyone can lie their way through a wet paper bag and hope that everyone listening will believe them. How many people believed Susan Smith to be telling the truth in the beginning? I even had arguments with fellow officers who believed her when I never did. How many people believed Scott Peterson or Ted Bundy? How many people STILL believe OJ? Wynona Ryder even lied when she insisted she did not steal the scarf even though there was surveillance footage showing she did otherwise. Casey Anthony lied for months. "Friends" of Brooke Bennett and Amber Dubois have lied even though they were never involved in their murder and/or disappearances...Must I go on?
You don't have to go on.. some of the other cases you named just fit this scenerio alot better than Susan Smith's who basically used race as a way to get away with killing her pwn children. Like I said.. I know where you were going with it and understood what you were saying. I might have come across wrong with what I said.. I was posting quickly as I was on my way out the door. The faces of those two little boys are still burned into my memory for some reason.. such sweet little babies.

[Musterion]

Oops, I misstated something about the church... I think the rule is that if he was caught doing something they considered a sin or bad or whatever, then he would not be allowed to resign. Therefore people theorized he quit before that happened, i.e., someone found out something he was doing

"please know all the facts. we resigned on monday feb. 11 and he went missing wed. feb 13.
our resignation should not be of any importance at this time. finding my husband and my kids’ father is the only importance here.
Comment by Christine Francisco — February 18, 08 9:45 am"

Christine says, 'we'.

If Nicholas was going to run away into the new life, why would he 'resign' from the church?

IMO.
M.

[MystryPhobia]

I would assume that all of his design work was also on his laptop. It is possible he just forgot his sketches, but what I don't get is him leaving the drawings his children made that were on his bulletin board. From all accounts he had some time to kill at the end of the day and was playing a video game. I would think if he knew it was the last time he would be in that office that he would be checking everything one last time.

I just think something bad had to have happened to him.
Not that this means anything but I don't think anybody believes that he planned to disappear for any amount of time. There was absolutely no indication that he was planning on leaving.. he took nothing.. no memento.. nothing that had been discovered.

[Musterion]

Not that this means anything but I don't think anybody believes that he planned to disappear for any amount of time. There was absolutely no indication that he was planning on leaving.. he took nothing.. no memento.. nothing that had been discovered.

Hey, M.

You mean that it was a spur of the moment thing? Not a long thought out plan?

IMO.
M.

[Cheri_G]

I'm just curious as no one has responded to something I raised - at least not that I saw. Was it known whether Nicholas was experiencing emotional confusion or personal problems before he went missing? Stressed out or whatever. I don't think I need to cover all the bases, but something of those sorts?


SilverDove - your description of Christine's behavior or change in behavior goes along with what I concluded in what I have read about the case and I do not think that would be particularly unusual given the circumstances. Other seemed to have confirmed Nick had stuff going on that she didn't fully know until after he came up missing.

Not sure if anybody already answered this...

There were no indications from Christine, Nick's co-workers, friends, or family that he was experiencing any kind of problems in the days/weeks prior to going missing or that his behaviour was different that day.

[SilverDove]

Harlett posted that Nicholas had been identified as stevenspazz through Christine.

Many believe since that information came from Christine it is suspect.

IMO.
M.

This always makes me wonder. If Christine was the one who found it lets just say by having access to the emails doesn't it seem like it is more likely to be him. I mean it would be much harder for her to find a look alike and fake all of this. We also know it was set up long enough ago that it can't be a fake. Also even though it is old it does show he had been willing to post naked pictures of himself at some point which makes it possible that he moved on to other sites including AFF as time went on.

[Cheri_G]

I suppose these were checked out, but that doesn't mean LE could definitively know anything or would tell the public what all has been checked out

"Francisco responded to me on aim tonight. but acted like he didn't know who i was"
http://www.yayhooray.com/thread/139785/YH-member-gone-missing?page=30

Others on the thread say Nicholas had talked about moving to San Diego sometime before he came up missing - folks at B3 Studios.

Still others say that there may be reasons connected to the Mars Hill Church - like he was dissatisfied, and so on. It does seem weird that they resigned from the church, what within a couple of days before he came up missing?

Christine and possibly some others (including LE) she may have given the login details to had been logging into Nick's accounts. It was likely one of them on aim and they didn't know that person which is why he/she got the impression they didn't.

I do remember seeing an old post somewhere by Nick about thinking he might like to move his family to California someday. I don't have the link handy and the post may not be there any more. Most pictures of him and posts he made on his various accounts have since been deleted.

[SilverDove]

Everyone is welcome on this thread. My question is why would someone say something when it's not true. Regardless if the person is pro-Christine or pro-Nicholas, or however the camps are divided.... the ones who think Nicholas is a lying, dirty, perverted scumbag, and those who don't, whatever......

Have you ever noticed that most people don't think that having sex even with multiple partners is dirty, perverted or makes one a scumbag? Many adults figure to each his own as long as it is between consensual adults. Now if he had secrets which the police said then at some point he was lying. If his phone wasn't dead but he said it was he lied. If he had sexual partners he didn't tell his wife about he lied. So I do believe he lied but none of the other names you have called him.

I really wish you would not use so many loaded words to make things sound worse then they are. BTW do you think Jeremy Scully was a "lying, dirty, perverted scumbag"? Because he was doing all the things that have been speculated about Nicholas.

Speculation isn't libel or no one could talk about any missing person case.

[Casspian]

I suspect that enough of what Christine says she found as far as finances and accounts/communciation online through myspace/aff/etc. was verified by LE to convince them that not only did she not have anything to do with this, but that most probably Nicholas walked. I sincerely doubt, whether it is the accounts mentioned or not, that they did not verify enough to make them think this.

[SeattleEddie]

Libel An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Libel is a tort (a type of civil wrong), and the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. Libel and slander (an untruthful statement that is spoken, but not published in writing or broadcast through the media), are both considered forms of defamation.from http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/libel-term.html

The question isn't what I think. Doesn't matter what I think about adulterous sex with multiple partners.

Or here's a better one, from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Libel:
LIBEL, libellus, criminal law. A malicious defamation expressed either in printing or writing, or by signs or pictures, tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead, with intent to provoke the living; or the reputation of one who is alive, and to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Hawk. b. 1, c. 73, s. 1; Wood's Inst, 444; 4 Bl. Com. 150; 2 Chitty, Cr. Law, 867; Holt on Lib. 73; 5 Co. 125; Salk. 418; Ld. Raym. 416; 4. T. R. 126; 4 Mass. R. 168; 9 John. 214; 1 Den. Rep. 347; 2 Pick. R. 115; 2 Kent, Com. 13.

[SeattleEddie]

I suspect that enough of what Christine says she found as far as finances and accounts/communciation online through myspace/aff/etc. was verified by LE to convince them that not only did she not have anything to do with this, but that most probably Nicholas walked. I sincerely doubt, whether it is the accounts mentioned or not, that they did not verify enough to make them think this.

There is no evidence that LE believes that Nicholas walked. HE is still on the list of missing and his case has been assigned to the cold case squad.

[Cheri_G]

This always makes me wonder. If Christine was the one who found it lets just say by having access to the emails doesn't it seem like it is more likely to be him. I mean it would be much harder for her to find a look alike and fake all of this. We also know it was set up long enough ago that it can't be a fake. Also even though it is old it does show he had been willing to post naked pictures of himself at some point which makes it possible that he moved on to other sites including AFF as time went on.

There's some inconsitencies regarding the computers.

There's the 'wears his laptop like a wedding ring' comment and the comments from someone who supposedly was told by Christine that he never let his laptop out of his sight and even took it to the bathroom. (I believe these are exaggerations since all he would have to do to keep someone from snooping through it is password it and log out when he wasn't using it)

These are comments that could lead one to believe he was keeping secrets on his laptop. Which in turn one may reasonably think that those secrets were the alleged secret sex life.

However, all the adult accounts that were found were supposedly found by Christine on the home computer. A place where she could have found them at any time. This leads me to believe that either the accounts are not his or if they are, she knew about them before he went missing.

[Musterion]

I suspect that enough of what Christine says she found as far as finances and accounts/communciation online through myspace/aff/etc. was verified by LE to convince them that not only did she not have anything to do with this, but that most probably Nicholas walked. I sincerely doubt, whether it is the accounts mentioned or not, that they did not verify enough to make them think this.

If that's true, then why is Nicholas' case on the Cold Case site?

With criteria such as: "Based on factors determined during these investigations, we suspect that foul play may be involved in their disappearances."

And: "Detectives Reopen Cold Cases, Look To Public For Help"

"Sheehan's case is one of 193 homicide cases and missing person cases believed to be homicides getting another look from the Sheriff's Office and being categorized by solvability." (Bolding Mine)

IMO.
M.

[SilverDove]

Libel An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Libel is a tort (a type of civil wrong), and the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. Libel and slander (an untruthful statement that is spoken, but not published in writing or broadcast through the media), are both considered forms of defamation.from http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/libel-term.html

The question isn't what I think. Doesn't matter what I think about adulterous sex with multiple partners.

Or here's a better one, from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Libel:
LIBEL, libellus, criminal law. A malicious defamation expressed either in printing or writing, or by signs or pictures, tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead, with intent to provoke the living; or the reputation of one who is alive, and to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Hawk. b. 1, c. 73, s. 1; Wood's Inst, 444; 4 Bl. Com. 150; 2 Chitty, Cr. Law, 867; Holt on Lib. 73; 5 Co. 125; Salk. 418; Ld. Raym. 416; 4. T. R. 126; 4 Mass. R. 168; 9 John. 214; 1 Den. Rep. 347; 2 Pick. R. 115; 2 Kent, Com. 13.

Oh good there is no problem since nothing has been posted to do anything of those things. Also I think king 5 will be in much more trouble then a few people talking here on a board.

None of what has been said here has been malicious it has been in the hopes of finding a man who is missing. It hasn't been done to expose him to hatred, contempt or ridicule it has been done to find a missing person. Maybe you have forgotten that there is a missing man we are trying to find.

Also I truly hope that Nicholas comes forward to press a libel case because then we would find out what is and isn't true wouldn't we.

Or maybe you would rather we just close the board down since there is a lot of libel about Christine going around too. Remember libel has nothing to do with if someone can or can't defend themselves.

[Casspian]

Libel An untruthful statement about a person, published in writing or through broadcast media, that injures the person's reputation or standing in the community. Libel is a tort (a type of civil wrong), and the injured person can bring a lawsuit against the person who made the false statement. Libel and slander (an untruthful statement that is spoken, but not published in writing or broadcast through the media), are both considered forms of defamation.from http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/libel-term.html

The question isn't what I think. Doesn't matter what I think about adulterous sex with multiple partners.

Or here's a better one, from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Libel:
LIBEL, libellus, criminal law. A malicious defamation expressed either in printing or writing, or by signs or pictures, tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead, with intent to provoke the living; or the reputation of one who is alive, and to expose him to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule. Hawk. b. 1, c. 73, s. 1; Wood's Inst, 444; 4 Bl. Com. 150; 2 Chitty, Cr. Law, 867; Holt on Lib. 73; 5 Co. 125; Salk. 418; Ld. Raym. 416; 4. T. R. 126; 4 Mass. R. 168; 9 John. 214; 1 Den. Rep. 347; 2 Pick. R. 115; 2 Kent, Com. 13.


Why are you posting this?

[SilverDove]

There's some inconsitencies regarding the computers.

There's the 'wears his laptop like a wedding ring' comment and the comments from someone who supposedly was told by Christine that he never let his laptop out of his sight and even took it to the bathroom. (I believe these are exaggerations since all he would have to do to keep someone from snooping through it is password it and log out when he wasn't using it)

These are comments that could lead one to believe he was keeping secrets on his laptop. Which in turn one may reasonably think that those secrets were the alleged secret sex life.

However, all the adult accounts that were found were supposedly found by Christine on the home computer. A place where she could have found them at any time. This leads me to believe that either the accounts are not his or if they are, she knew about them before he went missing.

Once you have control of the the internet provider and the server where the web page was you don't need access to the original computer. Nicholas and Christine used email accounts that were on the server with the web site. If you remember Christine post about how she remembered the password to the server? Once she was on the server it would be easy to get into the email accounts. Once you are into those you can check what "spam" is coming in. You can also start feeding the emails into forums, paypal, facebook, and many other places to get passwords and user names emailed back. As you get into more accounts you can find more stuff. This is what I have always thought that Harlett and Christine did to find the information they did. Would have been a slow start and waiting for stuff to start showing up but once it did you could really get rolling.

[Casspian]

If that's true, then why is Nicholas' case on the Cold Case site?

With criteria such as: "Based on factors determined during these investigations, we suspect that foul play may be involved in their disappearances."

And: "Detectives Reopen Cold Cases, Look To Public For Help"

"Sheehan's case is one of 193 homicide cases and missing person cases believed to be homicides getting another look from the Sheriff's Office and being categorized by solvability." (Bolding Mine)

IMO.
M.


Where is the link to his case? It looks like what you have quoted is about this case

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/405333_coldcase21ww.html although I don't see Nicholas' name on this page

I believe you that he is on the list, but I'm not sure how I can comment on what that means based on your post

[Casspian]

This is what I find on nicholas so far

http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/sheriff/Contact/TIPS/Missing/2000%20to%20current.aspx

and this general explanation of cases?

The King County Sheriff’s Office Major Crimes Unit is responsible for investigating crimes such as homicide, robbery, and felony assault. They also are responsible for investigating tips regarding “cold” homicide and missing persons cases.

They can't prove he is missing on his own accord so maybe they felt they had to assign it here or give it one more go or felt pressured to??

[SilverDove]

If that's true, then why is Nicholas' case on the Cold Case site?

With criteria such as: "Based on factors determined during these investigations, we suspect that foul play may be involved in their disappearances."

And: "Detectives Reopen Cold Cases, Look To Public For Help"

"Sheehan's case is one of 193 homicide cases and missing person cases believed to be homicides getting another look from the Sheriff's Office and being categorized by solvability." (Bolding Mine)

IMO.
M.

Did you ever notice this statement " If the reviewer suspects foul play, the case is immediately assigned to a Major Crimes detective." and the fact that NO detective is assigned to Nicholas' Case?

Seems that he is missing but not believed to be foul play since he has no detective assigned.

[need2no]

This always makes me wonder. If Christine was the one who found it lets just say by having access to the emails doesn't it seem like it is more likely to be him. I mean it would be much harder for her to find a look alike and fake all of this. We also know it was set up long enough ago that it can't be a fake. Also even though it is old it does show he had been willing to post naked pictures of himself at some point which makes it possible that he moved on to other sites including AFF as time went on.

It was stated by HOH that Christine believed this was a picture of Nicholas because she recognized the chair in the photo, and she told HOH that she still had the chair, and then another time it was stated Christine said she used to have that chair in her apartment. So which was it, she still has it, or not? Anyway, if you look at the picture, (what you can see of this chair), it is a very common desk type chair, nothing special or unusual about it to stand out as proof it's a chair the Fransciso's own, or once owned. Probably bunches of those (dated) type chairs still in use.

I don't think when it was put online has anything do to with whether or not it's a fake, nor does it prove it's Nicholas. Perhaps someone came across this pic when researching 'Steven'; we know many were trying to assist Christine with finding out something about Nicholas to explain his disappearance. Maybe when whoever came across this pic they thought the part of body that is showing looked similiar to Nic, combined with the name Steven in the mix.

Personally I've alway thought that if Stevenpazz was indeed Nicholas, perhaps this was done as a joke between two young married adults just playing around having a little online fun. Maybe they wanted to see how many hits and comments he got just for kicks and giggles. Maybe Nicholas did it on a dare, and photographer Christine took the shot. The picture certainly didn't expose anything, and was just a suggestive or teasing type of photo. If Nicholas had done this on his own to test the water, he sure didn't show any interest in it after only one comment from a visitor to this site, in fact he never even logged on the site again.

For me this pic/blog doesn't amount to a hill of beans, and certainly doesn't prove Nicholas led a secret life.

[Musterion]

This is what I find on nicholas so far

http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/sheriff/Contact/TIPS/Missing/2000%20to%20current.aspx

and this general explanation of cases?


They can't prove he is missing on his own accord so maybe they felt they had to assign it here or give it one more go or felt pressured to??

I'm sorry, Caspian! I didn't add the links and I should have.

I just have a sense if they had all the information that you stated that CFC gave them and they verified it, they may not be inclined to waste the limited resources, only 18 months worth, on adding Nicholas to the CC Unit.

Why would they? There are many other cases that could be given the time and money where there isn't any 'verified' secret life. ???

IMO.
M.

[Musterion]

Did you ever notice this statement " If the reviewer suspects foul play, the case is immediately assigned to a Major Crimes detective." and the fact that NO detective is assigned to Nicholas' Case?

Seems that he is missing but not believed to be foul play since he has no detective assigned.

Scott Tompkins and Jake Pavlovich are detectives. They are in the King County Major Crimes Division, Cold Case Squad.

This is what it says:

"Mr. Francisco was last seen leaving his place of employment in the city of Seattle, on 02/13/08 at approx. 1800 hours. He was believed to be in route to the Tukwila Costco & then home to his residence in the city of SeaTac. The investigation showed that he made no purchases at the Costco the day he disappeared. His car was found weeks later in the city of Federal Way in South King County.

Anyone with information on his whereabouts or disappearance is asked to call detectives. KCSO Case # 08-037211

King County Major Crimes, Cold Case Squad 206-296-7530"

http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/sheriff/Contact/TIPS/Missing/2000%20to%20current.aspx

It says 'call detectives'. Plural. I would say that at least TWO detectives are on the case. Not zero.

IMO.
M.

[Casspian]

I'm sorry, Caspian! I didn't add the links and I should have.

I just have a sense if they had all the information that you stated that CFC gave them and they verified it, they may not be inclined to waste the limited resources, only 18 months worth, on adding Nicholas to the CC Unit.

Why would they? There are many other cases that could be given the time and money where there isn't any 'verified' secret life. ???

IMO.
M.



I don't know ... I hope it's because they got some new information that leads to something fruitful and the best outcome possible!

I don't see the secret life stuff as conflicting here - that could be seen either way depending on whether they have info to say it 'could' be something other than his walking away

[SilverDove]

I'm sorry, Caspian! I didn't add the links and I should have.

I just have a sense if they had all the information that you stated that CFC gave them and they verified it, they may not be inclined to waste the limited resources, only 18 months worth, on adding Nicholas to the CC Unit.

Why would they? There are many other cases that could be given the time and money where there isn't any 'verified' secret life. ???

IMO.
M.
That is a cookie cutter site the information is the bare minimum and would have taken less then 15 minutes add that info to but would have saved many hours of answering email as to why his case wasn't up there.

[Cheri_G]

Once you have control of the the internet provider and the server where the web page was you don't need access to the original computer. Nicholas and Christine used email accounts that were on the server with the web site. If you remember Christine post about how she remembered the password to the server? Once she was on the server it would be easy to get into the email accounts. Once you are into those you can check what "spam" is coming in. You can also start feeding the emails into forums, paypal, facebook, and many other places to get passwords and user names emailed back. As you get into more accounts you can find more stuff. This is what I have always thought that Harlett and Christine did to find the information they did. Would have been a slow start and waiting for stuff to start showing up but once it did you could really get rolling.

What your saying doesn't make any sense. Unless you are a skilled hacker you can not get in control of a server or anyone else's website.

If Christine was remembering a password to a server it is likely that it was the password to the server that hosts their personal website. Accessing that server would not in any way give her control of it or any other. Logging onto it just gives her access to their domain account and she would not be able to get in control of somebody else's website even if they used the same server without knowing the site owner's details.

The only email accounts she would have access to by logging into the server is the webmail that was set up for their domain. She wouldn't be able to see activity on any other email accounts Nick may have had unless they were set up to forward to the webmail.

[kelloggirl]

Everyone is welcome on this thread. My question is why would someone say something when it's not true. Regardless if the person is pro-Christine or pro-Nicholas, or however the camps are divided.... the ones who think Nicholas is a lying, dirty, perverted scumbag, and those who don't, whatever......

I haven't posted in this thread, but I read every single post, and wow, your post brought me out of lurking. I read this thread all the time, and don't feel I belong in either camp. Why does it have to be either or, to such extremes? I think you are unfairly characterizing those who believe the secret life might exist - BTW, I haven't seen one single poster call Nicholas what you just did above, and I also notice you don't characterize the other camp as those who think Christine is a murdering abusive wife, which would be the logical other extreme. Characterizing one side using a strawman is unfair.

Personally, I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't think Christine is a saint - she seems to me someone who was very angry at Nicholas, because she made assumptions that he left her and led to actions that could justifiably viewed as spiteful, negative and suspicious. She seems to enjoy her victimhood and likes attention on her poor little self. But I don't think she had anything to do with the disappearance either, but can understand why some might.

I also think the possibility that Nicholas had a secret life exists based on circumstantial evidence and rumors. Personally, I respect the posters here who have posted the information related to this possibility, and believe what they say because I have seen what they post in other forums and find them credible and thoughtful. Everyone must make that choice for themselves though. Can it be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? No, clearly, nothing in this case can be. But it can't be proven that it wasn't true beyond a reasonable doubt either, so to try to shut down discussion of the possibility on a discussion board seems unfair. Even if it's true, does that automatically mean he walked away? No, not necessarily. Does it make him a person unworthy of being found? Ridiculous to imply anyone who might think the secret life exists believe it does.

Personally, I believe he met with foul play. It might or might not have something to do with the alleged secret life. If he did indeed meet with foul play, isn't the important thing that the detectives solve the case, even if unsavory details and activities come to light? There is so little information. I remain open to any possibility.

[SilverDove]

Scott Tompkins and Jake Pavlovich are detectives. They are in the King County Major Crimes Division, Cold Case Squad.

This is what it says:

"Mr. Francisco was last seen leaving his place of employment in the city of Seattle, on 02/13/08 at approx. 1800 hours. He was believed to be in route to the Tukwila Costco & then home to his residence in the city of SeaTac. The investigation showed that he made no purchases at the Costco the day he disappeared. His car was found weeks later in the city of Federal Way in South King County.

Anyone with information on his whereabouts or disappearance is asked to call detectives. KCSO Case # 08-037211

King County Major Crimes, Cold Case Squad 206-296-7530"

http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/sheriff/Contact/TIPS/Missing/2000%20to%20current.aspx

It says 'call detectives'. Plural. I would say that at least TWO detectives are on the case. Not zero.

IMO.
M.

I think that if one of them is responsible for the case it is more likely that something is happening then when it is just call either of us. But hope springs eternal. Maybe not having one of them responsible is more important.

[Musterion]

That is a cookie cutter site the information is the bare minimum and would have taken less then 15 minutes add that info to but would have saved many hours of answering email as to why his case wasn't up there.

So, any other missing or unsolved murder that is on that site now or ever, same thing?

People are just hounding LE and so they grumble and say, 'oh cripe, might as well put that picture up there to keep people from emailing us, nuisances they are, let's go get donuts.'

Seriously?

IMO.
M.

[SilverDove]

What your saying doesn't make any sense. Unless you are a skilled hacker you can not get in control of a server or anyone else's website.

If Christine was remembering a password to a server it is likely that it was the password to the server that hosts their personal website. Accessing that server would not in any way give her control of it or any other. Logging onto it just gives her access to their domain account and she would not be able to get in control of somebody else's website even if they used the same server without knowing the site owner's details.

The only email accounts she would have access to by logging into the server is the webmail that was set up for their domain. She wouldn't be able to see activity on any other email accounts Nick may have had unless they were set up to forward to the webmail.



I'm betting that Nicholas had emails he used set up on the domains they had on their server. Logging into the server would have given her access to any emails that were created with the domain names of any of the sites they had.

[Cheri_G]

Did you ever notice this statement " If the reviewer suspects foul play, the case is immediately assigned to a Major Crimes detective." and the fact that NO detective is assigned to Nicholas' Case?

Seems that he is missing but not believed to be foul play since he has no detective assigned.

The cold case squad is reviewing Nick's case along with the others they have been given. Detective Holland is still the lead investigator for Nick's case.

[Musterion]

I don't know ... I hope it's because they got some new information that leads to something fruitful and the best outcome possible!

I don't see the secret life stuff as conflicting here - that could be seen either way depending on whether they have info to say it 'could' be something other than his walking away

Hey Casspian,

I don't understand the last part of your last sentence.

You posted "I suspect that enough of what Christine says she found as far as finances and accounts/communciation online through myspace/aff/etc. was verified by LE to convince them that not only did she not have anything to do with this, but that most probably Nicholas walked."

If LE was convinced that Nicholas probably walked based on what CFC found, I find it unconvincing that they would use resources to try to find him.

IMO.
M.

[Cheri_G]

I'm betting that Nicholas had emails he used set up on the domains they had on their server. Logging into the server would have given her access to any emails that were created with the domain names of any of the sites they had.

He may have set up a webmail for each of the domains they own or he may have had just one that was for all of them. It depends on how they were set up. And you're right, if she had the correct password for each she would have access to any mail that was sent or received from those accounts as long as they hadn't been deleted or purged.

[SilverDove]

He may have set up a webmail for each of the domains they own or he may have had just one that was for all of them. It depends on how they were set up. And you're right, if she had the correct password for each she would have access to any mail that was sent or received from those accounts as long as they hadn't been deleted or purged.

On the server I had once I was logged into the server I could change the password for any email that was on the server. Also new mail would be coming into the server all the time which could point to other accounts. Depending on the server you can have many email accounts. I think I could set up 100 lol but I only had about 10.

[Casspian]

On the server I had once I was logged into the server I could change the password for any email that was on the server. Also new mail would be coming into the server all the time which could point to other accounts. Depending on the server you can have many email accounts. I think I could set up 100 lol but I only had about 10.

That's how mine works.

[Casspian]

I haven't posted in this thread, but I read every single post, and wow, your post brought me out of lurking. I read this thread all the time, and don't feel I belong in either camp. Why does it have to be either or, to such extremes? I think you are unfairly characterizing those who believe the secret life might exist - BTW, I haven't seen one single poster call Nicholas what you just did above, and I also notice you don't characterize the other camp as those who think Christine is a murdering abusive wife, which would be the logical other extreme. Characterizing one side using a strawman is unfair.

Personally, I'm somewhere in the middle. I don't think Christine is a saint - she seems to me someone who was very angry at Nicholas, because she made assumptions that he left her and led to actions that could justifiably viewed as spiteful, negative and suspicious. She seems to enjoy her victimhood and likes attention on her poor little self. But I don't think she had anything to do with the disappearance either, but can understand why some might.

I also think the possibility that Nicholas had a secret life exists based on circumstantial evidence and rumors. Personally, I respect the posters here who have posted the information related to this possibility, and believe what they say because I have seen what they post in other forums and find them credible and thoughtful. Everyone must make that choice for themselves though. Can it be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? No, clearly, nothing in this case can be. But it can't be proven that it wasn't true beyond a reasonable doubt either, so to try to shut down discussion of the possibility on a discussion board seems unfair. Even if it's true, does that automatically mean he walked away? No, not necessarily. Does it make him a person unworthy of being found? Ridiculous to imply anyone who might think the secret life exists believe it does.

Personally, I believe he met with foul play. It might or might not have something to do with the alleged secret life. If he did indeed meet with foul play, isn't the important thing that the detectives solve the case, even if unsavory details and activities come to light? There is so little information. I remain open to any possibility.


Great post... thanks for taking the time.

[Cheri_G]

On the server I had once I was logged into the server I could change the password for any email that was on the server. Also new mail would be coming into the server all the time which could point to other accounts. Depending on the server you can have many email accounts. I think I could set up 100 lol but I only had about 10.

You could change the password to any random email set up using that server irregardless of who they belonged to or only the ones that were part of your domain?

You can set up more than one account on your domain and people quite often set up multiple accounts for various reasons. He may or may not have loads of email coming in. It would depend on if he used that as his primary email account. He could also set any of those up to forward to a different account not affiliated with the domain.

I also think you can set up a different username and password for each one you set up through your domain which means having access to one doesn't necessarily mean access to all of them.

[need2no]

He may have set up a webmail for each of the domains they own or he may have had just one that was for all of them. It depends on how they were set up. And you're right, if she had the correct password for each she would have access to any mail that was sent or received from those accounts as long as they hadn't been deleted or purged.

But as we know Nicholas was computer savvy, and was aware Christine knew her way around online. If Nicholas was leading a secret life why would he give Christine a password, or post anything secretive on line that Christine could discover at some point, especially when he had his own laptop.

Christine wrote: "all of his emails have been read by me as our email is on a server that i can access from my computer. thank the Lord that he told me the password and that I remembered it"

But she also wrote: " If any of you know of the sites or have chatted online with Nicholas please contact me via our family blog at thefranciscos.com
also if you know of is online names that is helpful too. trying to find out who he last chatted with."

Why did she need to ask for help if she could access his email?

Also if Nicholas gave Christine his password, I find it strange she claimed she was not able to access the cell phone bill online. How would Nic explain to Christine not sharing the password to his cell phone records, yet it was ok to read his email.

Ah, it's late and I'm rambling, and probably not making any sense.

[need2no]

You could change the password to any random email set up using that server irregardless of who they belonged to or only the ones that were part of your domain?

You can set up more than one account on your domain and people quite often set up multiple accounts for various reasons. He may or may not have loads of email coming in. It would depend on if he used that as his primary email account. He could also set any of those up to forward to a different account not affiliated with the domain.

I also think you can set up a different username and password for each one you set up through your domain which means having access to one doesn't necessarily mean access to all of them.


LOL Cheri - I wish I'd read this before I posted.

[Cheri_G]

That's how mine works.

I think you'll find that is not how it works. You can not change the password for any email account on the server as was stated. You can log on to the server and access your account and change any of your passwords only.

[Casspian]

But as we know Nicholas was computer savvy, and was aware Christine knew her way around online. If Nicholas was leading a secret life why would he give Christine a password, or post anything secretive on line that Christine could discover at some point, especially when he had his own laptop.

Christine wrote: "all of his emails have been read by me as our email is on a server that i can access from my computer. thank the Lord that he told me the password and that I remembered it"

But she also wrote: " If any of you know of the sites or have chatted online with Nicholas please contact me via our family blog at thefranciscos.com
also if you know of is online names that is helpful too. trying to find out who he last chatted with."

Why did she need to ask for help if she could access his email?

Also if Nicholas gave Christine his password, I find it strange she claimed she was not able to access the cell phone bill online. How would Nic explain to Christine not sharing the password to his cell phone records, yet it was ok to read his email.

Ah, it's late and I'm rambling, and probably not making any sense.


I think there are a lot of plausible explanations here. He had other email accounts that were not on the server? You can actually sign-up for accounts online also and never really need whatever email you signed in with to get into it. But no matter what, I don't see any reason he couldn't have had accounts that she didn't have access to even though she said she had access to all his emails - maybe she had access to the email she knew about. Maybe Christine never worried about looking at his cell phone records or didn't want to feel nosy or he changed access.

I don't quite understand why this once again boils down to Christine possibly lying or something when there are obvious and easy answers. :sad:

[Casspian]

I think you'll find that is not how it works. You can not change the password for any email account on the server as was stated. You can log on to the server and access your account and change any of your passwords only.

Actually, maybe it was misstated before, but it sounds to me like the two of you are saying nearly the same thing. I do know how mine works. I do it all the time. Once I login to the main account I just click a link that shows me every single email account on the server, one more click on a particular email account and I can change that password, delete an account or whatever.

[Cheri_G]

Actually, maybe it was misstated before, but it sounds to me like the two of you are saying nearly the same thing. I do know how mine works. I do it all the time. Once I login to the main account I just click a link that shows me every single email account on the server, one more click on a particular email account and I can change that password, delete an account or whatever.

(bold by me)

It may have just been poor wording. The reason I'm trying to clarify it is so people who haven't had their own domain understand what can and can't be done.

For example, what I bolded above is not precisely true unless your server is very different than mine.

Servers have more than one client. I think what it probably shows you (and what you probably mean) is every single email on your account shows up, rather than every single email account that is actually on the server.

[Casspian]

(bold by me)

It may have just been poor wording. The reason I'm trying to clarify it is so people who haven't had their own domain understand what can and can't be done.

For example, what I bolded above is not precisely true unless your server is very different than mine.

Servers have more than one client. I think what it probably shows you (and what you probably mean) is every single email on your account shows up, rather than every single email account that is actually on the server.

Yeah, you are correct about that! It's my main account on a server (not mine) and others have their accounts/domains on that server also. If I owned the server what I would probably see are all the domains, then email accounts associated with each domain. I do actually have 3 domains (no subdomains) and I log into each domain separately. I don't know if that's how it always works though... maybe so unless one forwards everything from one domain to another.

[need2no]

I think there are a lot of plausible explanations here. He had other email accounts that were not on the server? You can actually sign-up for accounts online also and never really need whatever email you signed in with to get into it. But no matter what, I don't see any reason he couldn't have had accounts that she didn't have access to even though she said she had access to all his emails - maybe she had access to the email she knew about. Maybe Christine never worried about looking at his cell phone records or didn't want to feel nosy or he changed access.

I don't quite understand why this once again boils down to Christine possibly lying or something when there are obvious and easy answers. :sad:

As I realized and stated, I probably didn't make much sense, and I had planned to go to bed, but here I find myself yet again.

Cass I am more than open to hear some obvious and easy answers, I just haven't gotten them yet.

I agree, Nic could have had accounts Christine wasn't aware of, in fact I would expect as much. I guarantee you my hubby couldn't tell you the name of this board where I spend way too much time. Again, it makes no sense that Nic would have had anything secretive where it could be found, or could easily be accessed by Christine, yet she is claiming to have discovered a secretive life he was leading even before they were married. Also it took her until March to 'remember' she had this password. All the while she was posting away online day in, day out.


As for the cell phone records you may know this became an issue when LE was having trouble trying to get the recs from the cell company. Finally Christine had to obtain them from the provider some time later, and stated she turned them over to LE. If she was able to access these recs online then denial of this would delay info getting to LE to assist with the investigation while they waited for the cell company to provide the records. Who did Nic talk to that day, if anybody, what time did he make the last call on his cell, who called him, if anybody, etc. I don't know if she had access or not, just seems worth questioning why Nic would give her the password to access his emails, yet she didn't have, and coudn't find a password to access his/their cell phones recs, and apparently never questioned this.

As you are aware Nicholas has been missing for well over a year, so everything has to be considered. It's all the little pieces of a puzzle that when put together create the big picture.

[Cheri_G]

Yeah, you are correct about that! It's my main account on a server (not mine) and others have their accounts/domains on that server also. If I owned the server what I would probably see are all the domains, then email accounts associated with each domain. I do actually have 3 domains (no subdomains) and I log into each domain separately. I don't know if that's how it always works though... maybe so unless one forwards everything from one domain to another.

I think if you are set up with subdomains, then you access your primary domain and through that have can access and manage your sub domains. Not sure if you can choose to set up seperate passwords for each subdomain as well or opt to have them all accessible once you log into the primary.

Anyways, we've kind of got off the point which was just that once Christine logged into the server she only had access to their account and the email accounts set up on it. She would not have been able to take control of the server or anyone else's website as was suggested.

[RainyNiteNTx]

Did you ever notice this statement " If the reviewer suspects foul play, the case is immediately assigned to a Major Crimes detective." and the fact that NO detective is assigned to Nicholas' Case?

Seems that he is missing but not believed to be foul play since he has no detective assigned.

He does have a detective assigned to the case. I'm not sure why you are trying to minimize this.

[RainyNiteNTx]

Interesting thoughts about the church, thanks for posting them. I also wanted to thank you for your other posts on this board too, you are a refreshing and interesting new voice here, with some interesting ideas, I for one would be glad to read any of your ideas and thoughts, should you feel like posting them.

Many Blessings
(and back to lurking mode for now)

The church connection was discussed at great length in the early days. The church, the sermons, the doctrines, the punishment of the sinners, the pastor, the facebook quizzes Christine took where she voted Mark Driscoll "most kissable", the volunteer work NF did with the church, the branching off of one the pastors - it was discussed ad nauseum.

This is an area that Christine would never comment on as to why they resigned and would never talk about it period. Since Nicholas is missing, only CFC would know what caused them to suddenly resign. She must have felt it had no bearing on his disappearance. IMO

[RainyNiteNTx]

I think that was written up around the time she may have been finding the secret life. I can't tell the exact day but it just seems like that was after. If at the time it went up she thought he was more likely alive then dead then that would make much more sense. Some people speculated that it was written more at him then about him.

Really? I never knew that. IIRC that poster was done very early in his disappearance, and she never let anyone know at that point??

[RainyNiteNTx]

Not that this means anything but I don't think anybody believes that he planned to disappear for any amount of time. There was absolutely no indication that he was planning on leaving.. he took nothing.. no memento.. nothing that had been discovered.

What do you mean? Is there some indication that he planned to leave for any period of time?

[RainyNiteNTx]

As for the cell phone records you may know this became an issue when LE was having trouble trying to get the recs from the cell company. Finally Christine had to obtain them from the provider some time later, and stated she turned them over to LE. If she was able to access these recs online then denial of this would delay info getting to LE to assist with the investigation while they waited for the cell company to provide the records. Who did Nic talk to that day, if anybody, what time did he make the last call on his cell, who called him, if anybody, etc. I don't know if she had access or not, just seems worth questioning why Nic would give her the password to access his emails, yet she didn't have, and coudn't find a password to access his/their cell phones recs, and apparently never questioned this.

As you are aware Nicholas has been missing for well over a year, so everything has to be considered. It's all the little pieces of a puzzle that when put together create the big picture.

(respectfully snipped)
If NF's cell phone was paid for by the company, Christine would not have had online access to view the bill, pay the bill, etc. However, if the cell phone that disappeared with Nicholas was their personal account, it is very easy to set up - I would bet most of you here view your bill online, pay it online, manage it online, etc. Because she says she did not have access makes me think it was not a personal cell phone.

It has been a long time, but I thought it was a company cell phone and Publicis was able to get the records as a favor because the cell phone provider was one of their accounts. But I'm not going back to search for that lol. JMO

[RainyNiteNTx]

So, any other missing or unsolved murder that is on that site now or ever, same thing?

People are just hounding LE and so they grumble and say, 'oh cripe, might as well put that picture up there to keep people from emailing us, nuisances they are, let's go get donuts.'

Seriously?

IMO.
M.

And who would be pressuring LE? Certainly not his exwife, and by all accounts of the folks on here, his family is doing absolutely nothing. So who would be putting so much pressure on LE that they would throw NF's name in there just cuz? Maybe he is listed because he is missing under suspicious circumstances. Just a thought though :glare:

[RainyNiteNTx]

How about because she was really really angry at being left alone with 2 kids and one on the way and with all the hormones wasn't feeling very loving at that time?

Well , we have seen her anger before - on her blog, on the ETSY site, on the West Seattle blog, so yeah sounds like she has a temper. I just didn't know until your post that when the poster was put out that she felt he had left voluntarily. There was no public indication she felt this way that early on. This is new information, to me at least.

[RainyNiteNTx]

How about because she was really really angry at being left alone with 2 kids and one on the way and with all the hormones wasn't feeling very loving at that time?

Going back to this after some research.......

IIRC, NF's missing poster was put out some time in February

http://www.fjtoys.com/fnf/

This was posted on March 24th...
http://supportingchristine.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/christine-were-thinking-of-you-and-your-family/#comment-319
on March 24, 2008 at 3:03 pm44 Christine Francisco
My kids and I have such a long and hard journey ahead of us. while this (the new home) is a great need and miracle we need to know where nicholas is and what happened. I still do not believe for one moment that he would leave on his own accord. While it is heartbreaking to move it is out of great need and we ask for prayers of strength and comfort. It does seem that many of our problems would be solved if we knew what had happened and if nicholas were to come home. But the fact is we don’t know where he is and he is not at home. So we can not count on the unknown but rather take in stride what is here in front of us and do the best that we can. As painful and heartbreaking as it is we can not live in the past and must look forward. I am not in any way giving up nor will I ever stop searching. I believe with all of my heart that God knows where Nicholas is and will reveal that to us in His time and at His will not our own. Yes it is frustrating but I trust God has a good reason as He only has love for us and only wants what is best for us. God will not forsake us.

This post by Christine was made 5 weeks give/take after Nicholas disappeared. I do not see any anger from her in this post - only concern and a firm belief that he would not leave them. In order for your explanation to be logical SD, NF's missing poster flyer would have had to have been created after March 24th IMO.

I can't imagine someone waiting five weeks to get a poster out for their missing loved one.

JMO

[SeattleEddie]

Kelloggirl, I am glad my post brought you out of lurking, and I actually agree with many of your ideas. I don't think CFC offed him. I don't think she is a "murderous abusive" woman. Whatever helps to find Nicholas is good.

The so-called speculation ad nauseum about his alleged "secret life" has done NOTHING to find him, even if, by some stretch of the imagination, it's true. IT hasn't gotten us even one baby step closer to understanding what happened to the man. IF not true, the speculation is spurious and demeaning to his character. And no, not because sexual activity between consenting adults is a demeaning activity, but because if he perceives himself to be a stand-up righteous family man, HE would find these accusations to be damaging to his reputation.

Likewise, the "speculation" that he is working in a house-cleaning company in California....another dead-end, absolutely false, wild goose chase that does NOTHING to find him. Someone is generating false leads. They don't come from thin air.

I'll believe whatever LE has to say about Nicholas' fate, and all I know is that his disappearance is being investigated. What seems to get lost in all this is Nicholas' side of the equation.

It's all about Christine's thoughts, ideas, feelings, problems, her personality, her photographs, HER children, her marriage, her financial problems, her speculations, her aprons, her pet rocks, her move across country, her fears, her etsy, her pregnancy, her getting a free house!!, her pets, her prayers, etc etc etc. Nicholas got lost once in RL and then again on his own message board! Discussing more of what she claims to have found about his secret life is just more of the same IMO.

[elf999]

Kelloggirl, I am glad my post brought you out of lurking, and I actually agree with many of your ideas. I don't think CFC offed him. I don't think she is a "murderous abusive" woman. Whatever helps to find Nicholas is good.

The so-called speculation ad nauseum about his alleged "secret life" has done NOTHING to find him, even if, by some stretch of the imagination, it's true. IT hasn't gotten us even one baby step closer to understanding what happened to the man. IF not true, the speculation is spurious and demeaning to his character. And no, not because sexual activity between consenting adults is a demeaning activity, but because if he perceives himself to be a stand-up righteous family man, HE would find these accusations to be damaging to his reputation.

Likewise, the "speculation" that he is working in a house-cleaning company in California....another dead-end, absolutely false, wild goose chase that does NOTHING to find him. Someone is generating false leads. They don't come from thin air.

I'll believe whatever LE has to say about Nicholas' fate, and all I know is that his disappearance is being investigated. What seems to get lost in all this is Nicholas' side of the equation.

It's all about Christine's thoughts, ideas, feelings, problems, her personality, her photographs, HER children, her marriage, her financial problems, her speculations, her aprons, her pet rocks, her move across country, her fears, her etsy, her pregnancy, her getting a free house!!, her pets, her prayers, etc etc etc. Nicholas got lost once in RL and then again on his own message board! Discussing more of what she claims to have found about his secret life is just more of the same IMO.

Contrary to what you are saying I believe that Nicholas' secret life could be the key to finding out what happened to him. Some good, productive interviews with some of the people who knew him in that life might get them to open up and really think, and it's possible they might come up with some information and leads as to where he might be.

Another interesting thing to do would be to follow up on the stories that Nicholas was seen at a gas station and in the area of Seattle near where his car was found, after he was reported missing. It would be really interesting to see if there is any truth to these rumors, plus it's possible someone who lives in the apartment complex where his car was found knows something.

If you can find the right people and get them to talk, you'll find the right information that will eventually lead to Nicholas. What's really needed is a private detective to look into these things.

Many Blessings

[RainyNiteNTx]

Once you have control of the the internet provider and the server where the web page was you don't need access to the original computer. Nicholas and Christine used email accounts that were on the server with the web site. If you remember Christine post about how she remembered the password to the server? Once she was on the server it would be easy to get into the email accounts. Once you are into those you can check what "spam" is coming in. You can also start feeding the emails into forums, paypal, facebook, and many other places to get passwords and user names emailed back. As you get into more accounts you can find more stuff. This is what I have always thought that Harlett and Christine did to find the information they did. Would have been a slow start and waiting for stuff to start showing up but once it did you could really get rolling.

I won't pretend to know about servers and domains - don't have either - just have an internet provider......but what you just said about the emails does not seem to match what Christine posted.......(bolded by me)

HIS PHONE DOESN’T HAVE GPS-
http://www.etsy.com/forums_thread.php?t ... 32&page=34

rinnovibodyspa says:
all of his emails have been read by me as our email is on a server that i can access from my computer. thank the Lord that he told me the password and that I remembered it. there are no important emails that link to this case. his phone doesn't have gps. I don't care what the news says my husband would not run off on me, just ask everyone who is helping and praying that have met him. there is nothing on his work computer either. he really was on his way home. he loved his family with his whole heart and then some. they might bring the police dogs out tonight. keep praying. keep looking.
Posted at 8:51 pm, February 18 2008 EST

[MystryPhobia]

What do you mean? Is there some indication that he planned to leave for any period of time?

No.. just meant. There is nothing that indicates he planned to leave that night or any night. Nothing. He didn't take anything. He didn't hide money in a secret account.. like he was saving for something. He didn't take the little mementos that you would think might be important to someone. I talked to Christine alot and never did I get the impression that she thought he planned to leave that night. I think she thinks that something might have happened that forced him to leave that night.

[Shelby1]

Going back to this after some research.......

IIRC, NF's missing poster was put out some time in February

http://www.fjtoys.com/fnf/

This was posted on March 24th...
http://supportingchristine.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/christine-were-thinking-of-you-and-your-family/#comment-319
on March 24, 2008 at 3:03 pm44 Christine Francisco
My kids and I have such a long and hard journey ahead of us. while this (the new home) is a great need and miracle we need to know where nicholas is and what happened. I still do not believe for one moment that he would leave on his own accord. While it is heartbreaking to move it is out of great need and we ask for prayers of strength and comfort. It does seem that many of our problems would be solved if we knew what had happened and if nicholas were to come home. But the fact is we don’t know where he is and he is not at home. So we can not count on the unknown but rather take in stride what is here in front of us and do the best that we can. As painful and heartbreaking as it is we can not live in the past and must look forward. I am not in any way giving up nor will I ever stop searching. I believe with all of my heart that God knows where Nicholas is and will reveal that to us in His time and at His will not our own. Yes it is frustrating but I trust God has a good reason as He only has love for us and only wants what is best for us. God will not forsake us.

This post by Christine was made 5 weeks give/take after Nicholas disappeared. I do not see any anger from her in this post - only concern and a firm belief that he would not leave them. In order for your explanation to be logical SD, NF's missing poster flyer would have had to have been created after March 24th IMO.

I can't imagine someone waiting five weeks to get a poster out for their missing loved one.

JMO

I don't know much about this, but it looks to me like www.findnicholasfrancisco.com was created on March 10, 2008, so the flyer was made on or before that. Like you said, Christine had given no indication that she was angry then. She seemed very worried and had nothing but good things to say about Nicholas.


Domain Name: FINDNICHOLASFRANCISCO.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS37.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS38.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 26-may-2008
Creation Date: 10-mar-2008
Expiration Date: 10-mar-2010

[RainyNiteNTx]

No.. just meant. There is nothing that indicates he planned to leave that night or any night. Nothing. He didn't take anything. He didn't hide money in a secret account.. like he was saving for something. He didn't take the little mementos that you would think might be important to someone. I talked to Christine alot and never did I get the impression that she thought he planned to leave that night. I think she thinks that something might have happened that forced him to leave that night.

What could that be? Trouble with the law?

[RainyNiteNTx]

I don't know much about this, but it looks to me like www.findnicholasfrancisco.com was created on March 10, 2008, so the flyer was made on or before that. Like you said, Christine had given no indication that she was angry then. She seemed very worried and had nothing but good things to say about Nicholas.


Domain Name: FINDNICHOLASFRANCISCO.COM
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server: whois.godaddy.com
Referral URL: http://registrar.godaddy.com
Name Server: NS37.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS38.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Status: clientDeleteProhibited
Status: clientRenewProhibited
Status: clientTransferProhibited
Status: clientUpdateProhibited
Updated Date: 26-may-2008
Creation Date: 10-mar-2008
Expiration Date: 10-mar-2010

Yeah - I see no indication that she was angry when the flyer was created, therefore put the "toast in the toaster" comment, which is where this all started. Maybe he really does leave toast in the toaster lol.

[Musterion]

No.. just meant. There is nothing that indicates he planned to leave that night or any night. Nothing. He didn't take anything. He didn't hide money in a secret account.. like he was saving for something. He didn't take the little mementos that you would think might be important to someone. I talked to Christine alot and never did I get the impression that she thought he planned to leave that night. I think she thinks that something might have happened that forced him to leave that night.

Hi M!

If she thinks someone forced him to leave, basically saying he was kidnapped, why divorce him? Why be so angry at him? He didn't leave willingly, so, that would mean that he did not leave her alone, two kids, one on the way with no income. The leaving was not his choice.

IMO.
M.

[RainyNiteNTx]

Hi M!

If she thinks someone forced him to leave, basically saying he was kidnapped, why divorce him? Why be so angry at him? He didn't leave willingly, so, that would mean that he did not leave her alone, two kids, one on the way with no income. The leaving was not his choice.

IMO.
M.

Why do anything that she did if she thinks he was abducted?

[Musterion]

Why do anything that she did if she thinks he was abducted?

It astounds me. If she really believes that he was forced to leave, IMO, her behaviours and actions are even more questionable.

Something is so not right.

Mystery, maybe you can jump in here?

IMO.
M.

[Musterion]

What could that be? Trouble with the law?

Good question.

LE said, though, that Nicholas wasn't involved in anything illegal.

Well, that they know of.

IMO.
M.

[RainyNiteNTx]

Good question.

LE said, though, that Nicholas wasn't involved in anything illegal.

Well, that they know of.

IMO.
M.

Right, but it seems they would have found out by delving into his disappearance, so it is probably not anything illegal. Possibly someone who self appointed themselves judge and jury?

[Casspian]

I think if you are set up with subdomains, then you access your primary domain and through that have can access and manage your sub domains. Not sure if you can choose to set up seperate passwords for each subdomain as well or opt to have them all accessible once you log into the primary.

Anyways, we've kind of got off the point which was just that once Christine logged into the server she only had access to their account and the email accounts set up on it. She would not have been able to take control of the server or anyone else's website as was suggested.

Cheri ... I agree, I think 'server' was not the correct term unless she and Nicholas owned a 'server'.

I'm not sure about the subdomain thing either - I suspect you have access to all subdomains once you access the domain they are related to. And, I haven't heard anyone say that Nicholas had a hosted account/domain that Christine did not know about (that was found, obviously).

[SilverDove]

Yeah - I see no indication that she was angry when the flyer was created, therefore put the "toast in the toaster" comment, which is where this all started. Maybe he really does leave toast in the toaster lol.

Funny I seem to remember that we all talked about how that seemed to be written to him not about him. Also it seems that that was the second poster that was put out. Who knows it is also easy when someone doesn't come home on time to be angry and scared at the same time.

This is becoming hopeless. Nicholas being on a cold case site now means that he was killed not just that he is still missing. People don't want to talk about anything that LE hasn't told them and start screaming nasty names and libel but never says that when it is about Christine even though it is the same for both. Quotes from early on are used to show that nothing else changed as things went along. Because Christine was stating early on that he wouldn't leave clear isn't the same as what she thinks now. If Christine ever said it then it has to stand forever she isn't allowed to rethink anything.

Nothing I have said should be thought of as NEW information I'm mostly just using my memory of events.

[Casspian]

quoting Cheri

I also think you can set up a different username and password for each one you set up through your domain which means having access to one doesn't necessarily mean access to all of them.

I think this is where confusion ensues. As far as I can tell from my experience and how my domains work, if I log into the domain an email is associated with I can easily access any email associated with that account. You need to password to access the email for that account. If need be, I change the password on email accounts after I log in to my domain access them - I do not need the old password.

However, that is not the same as accessing the email through some other means. If you access any particular email account, download email with software on your computer, it may or may not delete it from the server.

Other ways this is different than say a Yahoo account

* email accounts can be made/used basically instantaneously and then deleted as quickly and then you could go right back in an reinstate the same email address. It is therefore possible to not see an account when you login to your domain (because it has been deleted), but if you found out a certain address was used previously, you can just add it again and receive any email thereafter. Also, depending on the setting, some email that is not receivable due to a deleted account could dump into an admin account for that domain.

I guess what I am saying and I don't know what went on in this case - but there could have been layers to finding out Nick's communications, although that doesn't mean it would be so difficult for someone who had some savvy

[RainyNiteNTx]

Funny I seem to remember that we all talked about how that seemed to be written to him not about him. Also it seems that that was the second poster that was put out. Who knows it is also easy when someone doesn't come home on time to be angry and scared at the same time.

This is becoming hopeless. Nicholas being on a cold case site now means that he was killed not just that he is still missing. People don't want to talk about anything that LE hasn't told them and start screaming nasty names and libel but never says that when it is about Christine even though it is the same for both. Quotes from early on are used to show that nothing else changed as things went along. Because Christine was stating early on that he wouldn't leave clear isn't the same as what she thinks now. If Christine ever said it then it has to stand forever she isn't allowed to rethink anything.

Nothing I have said should be thought of as NEW information I'm mostly just using my memory of events.

What reference point should we use SD if not CFC's own words? You said she found emails on a server - I found a post that stated she found emails on the server and said they had nothing to do with his disappearance. Is this the type of thing you are talking about?

So her words and feelings changed - do the facts change also?

Why does it bother you so much that Nicholas is listed on a cold case site? Do you feel that his name being on the cold case site somehow diminishes your belief that he walked away?

[SilverDove]

What reference point should we use SD if not CFC's own words? You said she found emails on a server - I found a post that stated she found emails on the server and said they had nothing to do with his disappearance. Is this the type of thing you are talking about?

So her words and feelings changed - do the facts change also?

Why does it bother you so much that Nicholas is listed on a cold case site? Do you feel that his name being on the cold case site somehow diminishes your belief that he walked away?

At one point in time she found nothing in the email. Does that mean that no more email came in because he was missing? Could something odd have come in after that post. I reality she never said anything bad in public about him until the year show she said nothing. Yes she did talk to people in private and those people posted things including a private email but she didn't post anything.

"So her words and feelings changed - do the facts change also?'
Exactly what facts are we talking about? The only facts are he went missing and his car was found a week later in a parking lot of a condo and some people said it had been moved during the time it was there. Seems like that leaves a lot of room for her feelings to change without it touching the facts we have.

At the beginning she felt that he would never leave her. As she found stuff and talked to the police she came to believe that he may have walked away and wasn't honoring the marriage vows the way she felt he should. No facts were change just discovered and feeling changed.

I didn't say I had a problem with Nicholas being on a cold case site as missing, what I don't like is it being used as proof that he is dead or that the police have evidence that he is dead. Last I heard they didn't know one way or the other but there were things that made them lean towards walked away. I think it is wonderful that he is on the site but that doesn't prove that the police think he was murdered or maybe any of us who think he is still alive should just go away because the police have now announced that he is dead and murdered and I haven't seen the email.

[Casspian]

I think this is becoming an argument of "Nicholas was murdered vs. Nicholas walked" because of him being listed on the selected Cold Case files.

I do not think listing him there means they think he was murdered or met with foul play. I think it just means he could have because they can't prove he didn't or they can't prove he is alive. Further, it could be that saying they can't prove he is alive has a stricter meaning (I don't know) such as that they have been unable to talk with him in person or verify some person is working under his SS# that is Nicholas or there are valid sources claiming they have had contact with him and they can validate something. I'm not sure what they would say is enough evidence that he is alive and well and not being held captive or controlled, but I'm assuming it is probably that some registered legal agent has some personal contact with him and validates somehow that is him. Anyone know?

I guess the point is that I can't see this becoming a strict point for debate here, a debate that bifurcates the argument and pits one argument against the other. If there is actual evidence or facts that the Sheriff's office has found valid info that he is dead or did meet with foul play, then what is it or where is it or where is there verification this is the case ....

I hope this makes sense.

[need2no]

What reference point should we use SD if not CFC's own words? You said she found emails on a server - I found a post that stated she found emails on the server and said they had nothing to do with his disappearance. Is this the type of thing you are talking about?

So her words and feelings changed - do the facts change also?

Why does it bother you so much that Nicholas is listed on a cold case site? Do you feel that his name being on the cold case site somehow diminishes your belief that he walked away?

Frankly I don't see anyway around using Christine's own words.

You know Rainy could be the only thing that changed was what Christine stated publicly, not what was in her head all along. As we discussed throughout this case, initially CF wanted everyone to believe something horrible had happened to Nic, her devoted and loving husband, and as a result she would be alone with 2 children to raise and one on the way. She was in a financial nightmare according to what her sister stated just 2 days after Nicholas disappeared:

I just spoke with Christine's sister and she said that financial support is desperately needed. Finances were tight before this and now they're in somewhat of a crisis.Her sister's name is Jannel.
She also said that people in the area could call this number:
Autumn and lee
XXX-XXX-XXXX
to volunteer to search or donate meals.
Christine has a 4 and 2 year old and is pregnant with her third child.
They have not set up a donation center as of yet but THEY ARE TRULY IN NEED OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT! & HEARTS;
Posted at 11:26 am, February 17 2008 EST - Report this post

So right out of the gate money became the main concern, not locating Nic...Christine wouldn't listen to, or consider the possibility that Nic may have walked out on her, that he might have needed a break from RL, that he may return one day, that he might provide financial support either voluntarily, or by being forced to do so, that he may have been kidnapped and was being held somewhere and LE would locate him and bring him home. No, Christine stated she was convinced something horrific had happened to Nic, even used the word murder, and she was a distraught penniless, pregnant, stay at home mom.

For sure it wouldn't have been very profitable for CF to openly question, or go along with those on the boards suggesting NF might have just walked on her. To do so would have put her in the same category as many, many other women who have been left by their husbands for one reason or the other. Sad, but not so heart wrenching. The best this would have gotten her is some empathy/sympathy and prayers...but probably very little in the way of financial donations and gifts.

Singing Nic’s praises as a husband and father and stating emphatically that something horrific had to have happened to him, while constantly bringing up her children (even posting sweet family pictures including the family pets & the link to these pics), and repeatedly mentioning her pregnancy ripped at the heart strings of the Etsy groupm and others, who were probably thinking…. there but for the grace of God go I.

Eventually when Christina's own words didn't add up, and it came out that Christine was still receiving Nic’s salary, (a fact she neglected to mention), and people started questioning her, only to be met with less than kind responses, or Christine would stop posting for a few hours, she knew the gig was up, and just like a well written script she claimed (through HOH) that a secret life had been discovered online. I would imagine some were so horrified about the secret life stuff, and felt so bad for her, some continued to contribute money to her.

Now if LE is aware of this secret life 'stuff', including a secret paypal account where Nic was stashing money, and a $50 ATM withdrawal the night he vanished, wouldn't it stand to reason they would surmise Nicholas likely just walked out on his family for a new life? Why would they waste time (and resources) adding him to cold case investigations with so many others who are missing who don’t a history of secretive bank accounts, financial problems, and a secret sex life going back many years. Adding him to the Cold Case investigations to me says they have some information, some reason to believe Nicholas didn’t just walk away voluntarily. Of course they would never state publicly what this information is, or why they decided to investigate further since they wouldn’t want to give a ‘heads up’ to anyone who is considered a POI in their investigation.


JMO

[SeattleEddie]

I guess the point is that I can't see this becoming a strict point for debate here, a debate that bifurcates the argument and pits one argument against the other. If there is actual evidence or facts that the Sheriff's office has found valid info that he is dead or did meet with foul play, then what is it or where is it or where is there verification this is the case ....

I hope this makes sense.

emphasis added, snipped for focus

I don't think this is information they would be sharing with the public right now. Do you?

[SeattleEddie]

Frankly I don't see anyway around using Christine's own words.

You know Rainy could be the only thing that changed was what Christine stated publicly, not what was in her head all along. As we discussed throughout this case, initially CF wanted everyone to believe something horrible had happened to Nic, her devoted and loving husband, and as a result she would be alone with 2 children to raise and one on the way. She was in a financial nightmare according to what her sister stated just 2 days after Nicholas disappeared:

I just spoke with Christine's sister and she said that financial support is desperately needed. Finances were tight before this and now they're in somewhat of a crisis.Her sister's name is Jannel.
She also said that people in the area could call this number:
Autumn and lee
XXX-XXX-XXXX
to volunteer to search or donate meals.
Christine has a 4 and 2 year old and is pregnant with her third child.
They have not set up a donation center as of yet but THEY ARE TRULY IN NEED OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT! & HEARTS;
Posted at 11:26 am, February 17 2008 EST - Report this post

So right out of the gate money became the main concern, not locating Nic...Christine wouldn't listen to, or consider the possibility that Nic may have walked out on her, that he might have needed a break from RL, that he may return one day, that he might provide financial support either voluntarily, or by being forced to do so, that he may have been kidnapped and was being held somewhere and LE would locate him and bring him home. No, Christine stated she was convinced something horrific had happened to Nic, even used the word murder, and she was a distraught penniless, pregnant, stay at home mom.

For sure it wouldn't have been very profitable for CF to openly question, or go along with those on the boards suggesting NF might have just walked on her. To do so would have put her in the same category as many, many other women who have been left by their husbands for one reason or the other. Sad, but not so heart wrenching. The best this would have gotten her is some empathy/sympathy and prayers...but probably very little in the way of financial donations and gifts.

Singing Nic’s praises as a husband and father and stating emphatically that something horrific had to have happened to him, while constantly bringing up her children (even posting sweet family pictures including the family pets & the link to these pics), and repeatedly mentioning her pregnancy ripped at the heart strings of the Etsy groupm and others, who were probably thinking…. there but for the grace of God go I.

Eventually when Christina's own words didn't add up, and it came out that Christine was still receiving Nic’s salary, (a fact she neglected to mention), and people started questioning her, only to be met with less than kind responses, or Christine would stop posting for a few hours, she knew the gig was up, and just like a well written script she claimed (through HOH) that a secret life had been discovered online. I would imagine some were so horrified about the secret life stuff, and felt so bad for her, some continued to contribute money to her.

Now if LE is aware of this secret life 'stuff', including a secret paypal account where Nic was stashing money, and a $50 ATM withdrawal the night he vanished, wouldn't it stand to reason they would surmise Nicholas likely just walked out on his family for a new life? Why would they waste time (and resources) adding him to cold case investigations with so many others who are missing who don’t a history of secretive bank accounts, financial problems, and a secret sex life going back many years. Adding him to the Cold Case investigations to me says they have some information, some reason to believe Nicholas didn’t just walk away voluntarily. Of course they would never state publicly what this information is, or why they decided to investigate further since they wouldn’t want to give a ‘heads up’ to anyone who is considered a POI in their investigation.


JMO

Great post, N2N. This is the kind of thinking that makes progress toward understanding what really happened IMO. Critical thinking.

[Casspian]

Kelloggirl, I am glad my post brought you out of lurking, and I actually agree with many of your ideas. I don't think CFC offed him. I don't think she is a "murderous abusive" woman. Whatever helps to find Nicholas is good.

The so-called speculation ad nauseum about his alleged "secret life" has done NOTHING to find him, even if, by some stretch of the imagination, it's true. IT hasn't gotten us even one baby step closer to understanding what happened to the man. IF not true, the speculation is spurious and demeaning to his character. And no, not because sexual activity between consenting adults is a demeaning activity, but because if he perceives himself to be a stand-up righteous family man, HE would find these accusations to be damaging to his reputation.

Likewise, the "speculation" that he is working in a house-cleaning company in California....another dead-end, absolutely false, wild goose chase that does NOTHING to find him. Someone is generating false leads. They don't come from thin air.

I'll believe whatever LE has to say about Nicholas' fate, and all I know is that his disappearance is being investigated. What seems to get lost in all this is Nicholas' side of the equation.

It's all about Christine's thoughts, ideas, feelings, problems, her personality, her photographs, HER children, her marriage, her financial problems, her speculations, her aprons, her pet rocks, her move across country, her fears, her etsy, her pregnancy, her getting a free house!!, her pets, her prayers, etc etc etc. Nicholas got lost once in RL and then again on his own message board! Discussing more of what she claims to have found about his secret life is just more of the same IMO.


How on earth can you say that having a secret life has had nothing to do with the search for Nicholas. I sincerely doubt the public knows everything. Christine might not know everything. I think you are assuming in your statements that because she has been online and communciating with people in various ways that we know everything she knows. On the other hand, people keep arguing that she knows stuff she is not saying - which could very well be leads in that secret life that could help find him.

I'm really perplexed about some people's arguments on here. Just to avoid trouble, how does anyone here know he didn't have a secret life? We are not privy to everything, I'm certain of that. Therefore, no one knows if something in a possible secret life would reveal itself as fruitful somewhere along the line.

If there is no evidence leading them to some perp involved in foul play, then it appears to me that ONE of the best possibilities for finding out what happened to him lies in any covert activities or unknown connections he had. I guess it could also be that someone who was known to be connected knows something about him they haven't told LE (and to make you happy let's include Christine in that). Let's also assume that something could help find him.

Ok, so are you saying that Christine knows something that could help find him dead or alive, yet she has some motive not to tell LE? Or are you just claiming you think she lied (because her behavior is suspicious) yet nothing she lied about would help find Nick?

I'm just trying to find, in this winding discussion about what Christine has or hasn't done, exactly what it is some of you are trying to find out. It's one thing to keep presenting things over and over. It's another to pin some fact down and theorize what that actually means and support your reasoning for that theory. I do not see that in the discussions here. I just see people keep saying that this is not right and that is not right.

If you want to assume Nick had no secret life for whatever reason, that is your choice. I think most people here don't even care about any judgmental qualities of that and are not debasing him or libeling him or whatever, they are just trying to use that to see if it provides any leads or sense of what could have happened. I do think you should quit accusing people of things that do think he probably had a secret life or just ignore their posts if that is just too distasteful to fit into your idea of who Nick was. Or else, if you have some personal information about Nick that is not circulating on the internet, then you should tell us what that is.

[Casspian]

SeattleEddie
Now if LE is aware of this secret life 'stuff', including a secret paypal account where Nic was stashing money, and a $50 ATM withdrawal the night he vanished, wouldn't it stand to reason they would surmise Nicholas likely just walked out on his family for a new life? Why would they waste time (and resources) adding him to cold case investigations with so many others who are missing who don’t a history of secretive bank accounts, financial problems, and a secret sex life going back many years. Adding him to the Cold Case investigations to me says they have some information, some reason to believe Nicholas didn’t just walk away voluntarily. Of course they would never state publicly what this information is, or why they decided to investigate further since they wouldn’t want to give a ‘heads up’ to anyone who is considered a POI in their investigation.

I already provided an explanation for this. And, your assumptions stem from the fact that you don't buy my explanation that as long as they can't prove he is alive, then it has to be considered for investigation. I think if they have some evidence that leads them to put many resources into this, it is most probable it is connected to some so called 'secret life' or a life we are not completely privy to, e.g., they have some fact or facts about who Nick was connected to or conversations or something he did or did not do that are still unexplained and could point in some direction that could help find him. Furthermore, I think it is ok to assume they either do not know if these facts indicate foul play or there is a reason to wonder if they do. Another reason I can surmise they might be keeping this alive as possible foul play or a homicide is if someone known to have been connected to Nick was connected to some other crime or some other crime is similar to Nick's case for some reason or if Nick was known to engage in risky behavior (this could be a lot of things but something that might have led to his death even if accidental - one thing that comes to mind but I am not saying Nick was doing this is accidental death during sex, like Auto-erotic asphyxiation or during BDSM practices).

[Casspian]

Also, as most of you already seem to know, a lot of other talk on forums about some secret life did not seem to be stiffled nor were people chided so heavily for bringing it up (at least not in most of the reading I have been doing). There does seem to be evidence of Nick having some alternative sex life but I won't characterize that as secret or not.

To review some of that information and that some people did verify that nics on one or more adult websites were verified as being Nicholas and that he had personally met some people from local groups on those sites. You can go here and scroll down for all the evidence found of NF's online and offline connections that were found relating to 'adult' interactions:

http://helpfindthemissing.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-2562-p-2.html


I frankly don't see that any of this should be dismissed nor that it is libeling or slandering Nick except that it appears he was deceitful to his own wife. I said 'appears' and that is as far as it needs to go if people are so upset by this.

[MystryPhobia]

I think this is becoming an argument of "Nicholas was murdered vs. Nicholas walked" because of him being listed on the selected Cold Case files.

I do not think listing him there means they think he was murdered or met with foul play. I think it just means he could have because they can't prove he didn't or they can't prove he is alive. Further, it could be that saying they can't prove he is alive has a stricter meaning (I don't know) such as that they have been unable to talk with him in person or verify some person is working under his SS# that is Nicholas or there are valid sources claiming they have had contact with him and they can validate something. I'm not sure what they would say is enough evidence that he is alive and well and not being held captive or controlled, but I'm assuming it is probably that some registered legal agent has some personal contact with him and validates somehow that is him. Anyone know?

I guess the point is that I can't see this becoming a strict point for debate here, a debate that bifurcates the argument and pits one argument against the other. If there is actual evidence or facts that the Sheriff's office has found valid info that he is dead or did meet with foul play, then what is it or where is it or where is there verification this is the case ....

I hope this makes sense.]

In another case I followed.. they thought she might have left on her own.. but were not sure. They did not say anything until the detective had spoken to her. They would not tell anyone where she was. Just that she was alive, safe, sound and asked that LE not tell where she was. They didn't. The detective tried to persuade her to contact her family.. or friends who were very worried about her and loved her.. which she did a few days later.

I don't think they will just take someone's word for it. They want to talk to him. Meet with him. Have another agency make contact with him.. etc. They will not disclose where he is if he didn't want them to. They would say that he had been located and he would be removed from the missing person website, I believe.

You know.. the detective has always maintained that it could go either way.

[RainyNiteNTx]

emphasis added, snipped for focus

I don't think this is information they would be sharing with the public right now. Do you?

No, they would not as it is an ongoing investigation.

[need2no]

Great post, N2N. This is the kind of thinking that makes progress toward understanding what really happened IMO. Critical thinking.

Thanks Eddie, hard to ignore those facts.

[need2no]

SeattleEddie


I already provided an explanation for this. And, your assumptions stem from the fact that you don't buy my explanation that as long as they can't prove he is alive, then it has to be considered for investigation. I think if they have some evidence that leads them to put many resources into this, it is most probable it is connected to some so called 'secret life' or a life we are not completely privy to, e.g., they have some fact or facts about who Nick was connected to or conversations or something he did or did not do that are still unexplained and could point in some direction that could help find him. Furthermore, I think it is ok to assume they either do not know if these facts indicate foul play or there is a reason to wonder if they do. Another reason I can surmise they might be keeping this alive as possible foul play or a homicide is if someone known to have been connected to Nick was connected to some other crime or some other crime is similar to Nick's case for some reason or if Nick was known to engage in risky behavior (this could be a lot of things but something that might have led to his death even if accidental - one thing that comes to mind but I am not saying Nick was doing this is accidental death during sex, like Auto-erotic asphyxiation or during BDSM practices).


I found it interesting you chose to ignore all of my post except the last paragraph, but of course it’s your right to do so.

I'd agree, Nicholas could have made the cold case list simply due to the length of time he has been missing with no evidence to point either to him walking, or to something horrible happening to him. To me it doesn’t matter why he made the list, I’m just glad he did, and hope it will result in finding out what happened to him, no matter what happened.

Are all cases of people missing for more than say a year in Washington state being handled by the Cold Case Squad? If not, there must be some reason Nicholas made the list. I assume each case must meet some criteria. We can only speculate, because for obvious and understandable reasons LE isn’t going to announce why his disappearance is being investigated by their Cold Case Unit. I don’t discredit some of your suggestions as to what may have led them to take another look at this case…anything, and everything is possible.

I have no interest in stifling anything in this case, including the possibility Nic had a secret life, a life that would have possibly been the reason he left everything behind. His family, his job, his friends, his house, his car, his bank account, his pets, his personal belongings, basically everything. I just want to see some real concrete undisputable proof, or confirmation from LE, neither of which I have seen to date. In the Jeremy Scully case LE came right out and publicly stated he was a member of the adult website, yet they have never stated that about Nic-why not if it’s true? LE knew the public was closely following this case and looking for answers.

My biggest question regarding Nic having a secret life would be… WHEN, when did he find the time. Between 2 jobs, time with his 2 children, his church activities, running marathons, building an addition for Christine, paying bills, helping with the housework, yard work, time with his pets, time for his many hobbies, online time, working many Saturdays (per co-worker), vacations with his family, etc…that didn’t leave much time, if any, for fooling around. I think Christine recently stated these rendezvous took place during Nic’s lunch hour, yet his co-worker said they didn’t really take lunch hours, and she had not noticed Nic missing from his desk for any extended period of time. I’ve heard of quickies, but I think this is a stretch. If he was so into a secret life enough to walk away from everybody and everything, it doesn't seem reasonable to think he indulged in this great pleasure only during his occasional lunch breaks, most people wouldn't have that kind of will power. (Just think about some of our politians and what they gave up being promiscuous, and they didn't contain it to their lunch hours.) Add that to the fact that everybody, including Christine have said Nicholas was the type to go straight home after work, he was not a bar hopper or anything like that. Christine stated if Nic was going to be even 15 minutes late arriving home he would call her, therefore she knew he wasn't simply showing up late on Valentine's day. Also she strikes me as the type to keep up with Nic and his whereabouts. Not unusual for a SAHM who has been alone with the kids all day and wants a break when hubby comes home.

[RainyNiteNTx]

At one point in time she found nothing in the email. Does that mean that no more email came in because he was missing? Could something odd have come in after that post. I reality she never said anything bad in public about him until the year show she said nothing. Yes she did talk to people in private and those people posted things including a private email but she didn't post anything.

"So her words and feelings changed - do the facts change also?'
Exactly what facts are we talking about? The only facts are he went missing and his car was found a week later in a parking lot of a condo and some people said it had been moved during the time it was there. Seems like that leaves a lot of room for her feelings to change without it touching the facts we have.

At the beginning she felt that he would never leave her. As she found stuff and talked to the police she came to believe that he may have walked away and wasn't honoring the marriage vows the way she felt he should. No facts were change just discovered and feeling changed.

I didn't say I had a problem with Nicholas being on a cold case site as missing, what I don't like is it being used as proof that he is dead or that the police have evidence that he is dead. Last I heard they didn't know one way or the other but there were things that made them lean towards walked away. I think it is wonderful that he is on the site but that doesn't prove that the police think he was murdered or maybe any of us who think he is still alive should just go away because the police have now announced that he is dead and murdered and I haven't seen the email.

No SD - no one should go away, but unless your feelings have changed I find it hard to believe that you think it is wonderful he is on the cold case site. You stated publicly in the past that you believe he left voluntarily and that you think he is a "total jerk".

[RainyNiteNTx]

N2N - great posts and thoughts today - as always. I go back to that poster on Yayhooray and one word in his post keeps bugging me. The word "political". I can understand the psychological, the practical, the emotional, but where would political come into play? Something to do with the church? Something to do with morals? Something to do with his job? What are your thoughts?

http://www.yayhooray.com/thread/1397...issing?page=26


Quote:
Makimbo

I think you guys should stop acting like reactionary children and give him a break. You don't know the details, you're just trying to read between the lines of some half-baked facts and, ultimately, you know jack sh#t about what went down.

From what I've been told (and I can't say who told me because they've asked me to keep their name out of this), but he didn't really have any choice. The odds were stacked against him, and really from a psychological, emotional, practical and political point of view, there was only one way he could go. Now, I think you should cut him some slack.

[need2no]

N2N - great posts and thoughts today - as always. I go back to that poster on Yayhooray and one word in his post keeps bugging me. The word "political". I can understand the psychological, the practical, the emotional, but where would political come into play? Something to do with the church? Something to do with morals? Something to do with his job? What are your thoughts?

http://www.yayhooray.com/thread/1397...issing?page=26


Quote:
Makimbo

I think you guys should stop acting like reactionary children and give him a break. You don't know the details, you're just trying to read between the lines of some half-baked facts and, ultimately, you know jack sh#t about what went down.

From what I've been told (and I can't say who told me because they've asked me to keep their name out of this), but he didn't really have any choice. The odds were stacked against him, and really from a psychological, emotional, practical and political point of view, there was only one way he could go. Now, I think you should cut him some slack.


Rainy, I was just about to log off when I saw your post. I've got to go prepare dinner for the family, but I'll give you my real quick response before I leave for a bit.

My take on that post was it most likely had to do with Nic's involvement with MHC. I never really considered Nic's job, but I suppose that could also be a possibility. To me something is very strange about the entire MHC 'resignation' just before Nic disappeared, as well as the church itself. I so hope this is something LE is delving into and can either get to the bottom of it, or confidently rule out their involvement. Of course this would require a lot of work and time. As we know organized religion can be so powerful, and they have a way of shutting intruders out, and protecting their secrets. Goodness knows Christine didn't want to talk about it. Must be some reason why, considering she talked about everything else in their lives.

And then there is Nic's mother's comment about persecution, which really puzzles me. Maybe they are all in fear of talking about what they know regarding the church and their suspicions. Sure would explain why Nic's family has been so quiet.

BBL

[Starkist]

There is prbably a good reason she doesn't want to discuss the MHC resignation and that most likely is that it would make her look bad as well and put her in a different kind of spotlight.

[Maranatha]

Since MHC has come up again. Ask me anything about it. I'm a member, and would be happy to answer respectful questions as best I can.

Up front, the Francsicos attended the West Seattle Campus, and I attend the main campus in Ballard. I have never met them, nor do folks I know have known them. Except for someone on another board who said they did, but I don't take as gospel what is said on a board. :)

[RainyNiteNTx]

Since MHC has come up again. Ask me anything about it. I'm a member, and would be happy to answer respectful questions as best I can.

Up front, the Francsicos attended the West Seattle Campus, and I attend the main campus in Ballard. I have never met them, nor do folks I know have known them. Except for someone on another board who said they did, but I don't take as gospel what is said on a board. :)

Is a formal resignation customary or necessary?

Does the church believe in punishment for those they deem sinners, and if so, what kind of punishment?

Thank you.

[Casspian]

]

In another case I followed.. they thought she might have left on her own.. but were not sure. They did not say anything until the detective had spoken to her. They would not tell anyone where she was. Just that she was alive, safe, sound and asked that LE not tell where she was. They didn't. The detective tried to persuade her to contact her family.. or friends who were very worried about her and loved her.. which she did a few days later.

I don't think they will just take someone's word for it. They want to talk to him. Meet with him. Have another agency make contact with him.. etc. They will not disclose where he is if he didn't want them to. They would say that he had been located and he would be removed from the missing person website, I believe.

You know.. the detective has always maintained that it could go either way.



Thank you for more info and it all makes perfect sense.

[Maranatha]

Is a formal resignation customary or necessary?

Does the church believe in punishment for those they deem sinners, and if so, what kind of punishment?

Thank you.

Since there is a formal member process, there is a formal resignation process. A member in good standing can resign at any time. People I have known who have resigned did so because they moved away, found a more "intimate" congregation more to their liking. MHC is big.

Punishiment???? Deemed sinners???? LOL! If that was true, I guess I would be up on a cross, crucified. Where the heck did you get that impression?

Thank you for being somewhat respectful. Good Lord, your last questions are just bizarre. In all due respect.

[Casspian]

I found it interesting you chose to ignore all of my post except the last paragraph, but of course it’s your right to do so.

I'd agree, Nicholas could have made the cold case list simply due to the length of time he has been missing with no evidence to point either to him walking, or to something horrible happening to him. To me it doesn’t matter why he made the list, I’m just glad he did, and hope it will result in finding out what happened to him, no matter what happened.

Are all cases of people missing for more than say a year in Washington state being handled by the Cold Case Squad? If not, there must be some reason Nicholas made the list. I assume each case must meet some criteria. We can only speculate, because for obvious and understandable reasons LE isn’t going to announce why his disappearance is being investigated by their Cold Case Unit. I don’t discredit some of your suggestions as to what may have led them to take another look at this case…anything, and everything is possible.

I have no interest in stifling anything in this case, including the possibility Nic had a secret life, a life that would have possibly been the reason he left everything behind. His family, his job, his friends, his house, his car, his bank account, his pets, his personal belongings, basically everything. I just want to see some real concrete undisputable proof, or confirmation from LE, neither of which I have seen to date. In the Jeremy Scully case LE came right out and publicly stated he was a member of the adult website, yet they have never stated that about Nic-why not if it’s true? LE knew the public was closely following this case and looking for answers.

My biggest question regarding Nic having a secret life would be… WHEN, when did he find the time. Between 2 jobs, time with his 2 children, his church activities, running marathons, building an addition for Christine, paying bills, helping with the housework, yard work, time with his pets, time for his many hobbies, online time, working many Saturdays (per co-worker), vacations with his family, etc…that didn’t leave much time, if any, for fooling around. I think Christine recently stated these rendezvous took place during Nic’s lunch hour, yet his co-worker said they didn’t really take lunch hours, and she had not noticed Nic missing from his desk for any extended period of time. I’ve heard of quickies, but I think this is a stretch. If he was so into a secret life enough to walk away from everybody and everything, it doesn't seem reasonable to think he indulged in this great pleasure only during his occasional lunch breaks, most people wouldn't have that kind of will power. (Just think about some of our politians and what they gave up being promiscuous, and they didn't contain it to their lunch hours.) Add that to the fact that everybody, including Christine have said Nicholas was the type to go straight home after work, he was not a bar hopper or anything like that. Christine stated if Nic was going to be even 15 minutes late arriving home he would call her, therefore she knew he wasn't simply showing up late on Valentine's day. Also she strikes me as the type to keep up with Nic and his whereabouts. Not unusual for a SAHM who has been alone with the kids all day and wants a break when hubby comes home.


Well, thanks for your reply. I do find it somewhat intimidating or stiffling to have people posting the definitions of libel and slander or whatever it was and stuff about ruining Nick's reputation. To have people jump on me (that's how it felt) just because I asked if the toaster comment was what people seemed to be making a big deal out of. And so on.

I don't know much about the Jeremy Scully case but I assume they said what they did immediately because they suspected he was dead or because he was found dead or they connected that to their POI - not sure when they did this. I'm not sure why you are asking ME why they didn't do this in Nick's case, your question appears rhetorical... again, based on different circumstances, I'm sure there is already a clear, pragmatic reason they announced such in his case.

There are also good reasons why they might no pursue many of the cold cases they have on file.

People who cheat find time to do that. It is a myth that people who cheat typically do the most obvious things like don't come home on time or leave at night or are late coming home or whatever. Yes, they might do these things, but many people who cheat make darn sure they do not do these things. I do not find your reasons that he was not cheating convincing, not even the coworkers comments about lunch. Cheaters get very creative and are very good most of the time at covering up their tracks. Some of them will purposefully call their mates just a few minutes before they engage to create a window. I've heard of them calling their mate while they are in the hotel room or some other place with someone - cell phones make this all very difficult to know and often the person they are with is complicit in the coverup. Some will restrict how they have contact with another person to only one means. Some try to make a hook-up on the spur of the moment, that way they are only engaging when it will work out for them. Some people are having sex in the bathroom with a coworker. I have no idea what Nicholas' MO really was and neither, probably, do his coworkers although someone who knew him might know. Not all cheaters are having sex all the time either. They may engage with someone say twice a month - so other peoples observations might mean nothing. Maybe most of it was online stuff. Some cheaters only do it when their partner is out of town and so on.

[Casspian]

Since there is a formal member process, there is a formal resignation process. A member in good standing can resign at any time. People I have known who have resigned did so because they moved away, found a more "intimate" congregation more to their liking. MHC is big.

Punishiment???? Deemed sinners???? LOL! If that was true, I guess I would be up on a cross, crucified. Where the heck did you get that impression?

Thank you for being somewhat respectful. Good Lord, your last questions are just bizarre. In all due respect.

Marantha... I had raised some questions here about Nick resignation (and Christine's I guess since they both resigned). The main point is that they both resigned a couple of days before Nick came up missing and it has been speculated they did this because he was/they were still in good standing, but maybe they knew they wouldn't be.

I probably mentioned sin, but not as related to punshiment except that someone would then not be in good standing - I honestly have no idea how someone gets out of good standing. Can you tell us how or what it is that would result in that?

[Casspian]

per questions about Scully

It appears to me as if police took his laptop after finding him dead and maybe after they had a POI (not certain about the last assumption based on how the article reads).

Police took Jeremy Scully's computer from his Bellingham apartment, which has now been taped off by authorities.

Detectives said they will be looking into Scully's Internet activity including alleged membership to a Web site where adults meet adults for sex.

http://www.kirotv.com/news/16088848/detail.html


So, for one, they had a dead body. For two, they identified a married couple as POI's. And, lastly, they had his laptop to actually search.

[Casspian]

And, it appears, the killer's wife immediately called police and told them she thought her husband killed him

This sequence of events is nothing like the sequence in Nicholas' case - but then again, why am I not surprised it was brought up in some twisted logic, rhetorial question thingy to support something for what reason know one knows, right???:confused:

[SeattleEddie]

How on earth can you say that having a secret life has had nothing to do with the search for Nicholas. I sincerely doubt the public knows everything. Christine might not know everything. I think you are assuming in your statements that because she has been online and communciating with people in various ways that we know everything she knows. On the other hand, people keep arguing that she knows stuff she is not saying - which could very well be leads in that secret life that could help find him.

I'm really perplexed about some people's arguments on here. Just to avoid trouble, how does anyone here know he didn't have a secret life? We are not privy to everything, I'm certain of that. Therefore, no one knows if something in a possible secret life would reveal itself as fruitful somewhere along the line.

If there is no evidence leading them to some perp involved in foul play, then it appears to me that ONE of the best possibilities for finding out what happened to him lies in any covert activities or unknown connections he had. I guess it could also be that someone who was known to be connected knows something about him they haven't told LE (and to make you happy let's include Christine in that). Let's also assume that something could help find him.

Ok, so are you saying that Christine knows something that could help find him dead or alive, yet she has some motive not to tell LE? Or are you just claiming you think she lied (because her behavior is suspicious) yet nothing she lied about would help find Nick?

I'm just trying to find, in this winding discussion about what Christine has or hasn't done, exactly what it is some of you are trying to find out. It's one thing to keep presenting things over and over. It's another to pin some fact down and theorize what that actually means and support your reasoning for that theory. I do not see that in the discussions here. I just see people keep saying that this is not right and that is not right.

If you want to assume Nick had no secret life for whatever reason, that is your choice. I think most people here don't even care about any judgmental qualities of that and are not debasing him or libeling him or whatever, they are just trying to use that to see if it provides any leads or sense of what could have happened. I do think you should quit accusing people of things that do think he probably had a secret life or just ignore their posts if that is just too distasteful to fit into your idea of who Nick was. Or else, if you have some personal information about Nick that is not circulating on the internet, then you should tell us what that is.

emphasis added
Your statement here is a logical fallacy (argumentum ad ignorantiam) in that just because something has not been proven to be false, it doesn't therefore make it true.

Likewise:
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to have sex with horses?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to dress up in women's clothes?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to eat a banana split every day before work?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to smoke crack?
how does anyone here know that he didn't have a secret apartment in Spanaway?
how does anyone here know that he wasn't a mass murderer?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to be spanked?

I mean, you can say any cockamamie thing, and because no one can prove it to be false (especially a negative statement), therefore it's true? Is that how we're thinking today? We're not going to make any progress with this kind of reasoning.

[Casspian]

emphasis added
Your statement here is a logical fallacy (argumentum ad ignorantiam) in that just because something has not been proven to be false, it doesn't therefore make it true.

Likewise:
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to have sex with horses?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to dress up in women's clothes?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to eat a banana split every day before work?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to smoke crack?
how does anyone here know that he didn't have a secret apartment in Spanaway?
how does anyone here know that he wasn't a mass murderer?
how does anyone here know that he didn't like to be spanked?

I mean, you can say any cockamamie thing, and because no one can prove it to be false (especially a negative statement), therefore it's true? Is that how we're thinking today? We're not going to make any progress with this kind of reasoning.

Oh, puleeeeze ... and you pick out one sentence and then attack my intelligence. There is no logical fallacy here. You can't prove he didn't have a secret life. The fact is it seems there is a lot of evidence he had a secret life and that seems like it could be really important to finding him.

You seem to be a little personally invested in this case, so I don't really think this is about ME :tongue:

[Starkist]

Oh, puleeeeze ... and you pick out one sentence and then attack my intelligence. There is no logical fallacy here. You can't prove he didn't have a secret life. The fact is it seems there is a lot of evidence he had a secret life and that seems like it could be really important to finding him.

You seem to be a little personally invested in this case, so I don't really think this is about ME :tongue:

You can't prove he did have a secret life. Have you seen any of the actual evidence or are you claiming what you have seen posted on a message board to be true and infallable?

SE personally invested in this case? Are you kidding me? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You have truly read more into here than what was actually ever posted! :tongue:

[SeattleEddie]

No, I did not attack your intelligence. I don't even know you. What I said is that if we want to make progress in discovering what happened to Nicholas, we need to use logical reasoning. Just because someone says there is a "secret life" is not evidence. Just because something is on a blog, or a message board, it's not evidence. Just because someone says something is true, doesn't mean it's true. Just because someone can't prove something is false, doesn't mean it's true. A picture of a naked man's torso on an anonymous chair is not evidence. I haven't seen any "evidence" of a secret life, and none has been conclusively presented. That's all. I'm sorry you are making this personal.

[Shelby1]

Since there is a formal member process, there is a formal resignation process. A member in good standing can resign at any time. People I have known who have resigned did so because they moved away, found a more "intimate" congregation more to their liking. MHC is big.

Punishiment???? Deemed sinners???? LOL! If that was true, I guess I would be up on a cross, crucified. Where the heck did you get that impression?

Thank you for being somewhat respectful. Good Lord, your last questions are just bizarre. In all due respect.

What do you do to resign formally? Do you meet with the pastor?

Also, not that this has any bearing, but I've always wondered if MHC passes around a collection plate like they did at my church when I was little. Or, are dues paid in monthly as in a Catholic church?

[RainyNiteNTx]

Since there is a formal member process, there is a formal resignation process. A member in good standing can resign at any time. People I have known who have resigned did so because they moved away, found a more "intimate" congregation more to their liking. MHC is big.

Punishiment???? Deemed sinners???? LOL! If that was true, I guess I would be up on a cross, crucified. Where the heck did you get that impression?

Thank you for being somewhat respectful. Good Lord, your last questions are just bizarre. In all due respect.

Maybe I should have used the word discipline rather than punishment. You volunteered to answer questions but since my questions offended you, I will find the answers elsewhere. Thank you.

[RainyNiteNTx]

Oh, puleeeeze ... and you pick out one sentence and then attack my intelligence. There is no logical fallacy here. You can't prove he didn't have a secret life. The fact is it seems there is a lot of evidence he had a secret life and that seems like it could be really important to finding him.

You seem to be a little personally invested in this case, so I don't really think this is about ME :tongue:

I'm not sure why it is important for people to believe as you do since by your own admission you state you know very little about this case. For the people who do know about this case and have followed it since day one, I would find it surprising if they were not personally vested to a degree. If you visit some of the other forums, you will find this is not uncommon.