Egg on the Face

Just a day ago we were told that the case was cold regarding Brian and Gabby.

Now, apparently, Brian’s remains have been found along with a notebook and a backpack.

What can we now expect in this very odd case?

We know that Brian did not take his wallet or his cell phone to the Mabry Carlton preserve.

Some have speculated that he did not take these items because he would have no need of them if he was trying to escape. Credit cards and cell phones can be tracked.

Others have stated that he did not take these items because he was planning to kill himself.

If he was planning to kill himself, then why did he need a knapsack?

One can understand why he might need a notebook if he was planning to kill himself. The notebook could be used to write a manifesto. Or it could represent an important part of his life: his art. Perhaps the knapsack existed just to carry the notebook.

However, if he was planning to kill himself why wouldn’t he write out his manifesto and leave it in his house?

My guess is that he was not planning on killing himself.

I still believe that he was delusional and not in full command of his rational mind. Much evidence points to that as has already been expressed in prior columns.

I believe that he believed that Gabby was still alive.

If he had a rational mind and was trying to escape why wouldn’t he just go to the Appalachian Trail? He could’ve taken a bus. He could’ve gotten there easily in the time it would have taken for the Feds to put out a warrant for his arrest.

But he didn’t.

He went to the swamps where the chance of survival is much less.

One could argue that he knew he was going to die and so chose a place that he felt comfortable with. That’s a valid point. And it would point to rational thinking.

If he was rational though, and consumed with grief and guilt, how was he able to hide this from his sister Cassie and her husband on 6 September? Was Brian merely an extremely intelligent introvert who had learned how to expertly conceal his emotions over the years?

It’s possible. Children of alcoholics or volatile parents are especially adept at concealing their emotions. We know so little about Brian’s family and his own psychological make up.

Analysis of the remains, the notebook and other personal items will be helpful in helping sort out whether Brian was delusional or rational.

That his remains and personal effects were discovered by his parents when prior search efforts revealed little is yet another oddity in this case, and it may come to pass that even more twists and turns will occur in this case before anyone can make a definitive judgment.

One thing is for sure. Everyone commenting on this case ended up with a little egg on their face no matter what their position was. But that is the nature of doing detective work.

The detectives are always one step behind the criminals. There is no shame in that. And being a theorist should never deter one from thinking or developing new theories no matter how wild.

Assuming that these remains are Brian’s, and they were legitimately found there, clearly he wasn’t in a motel room. Clearly he wasn’t in a friend’s apartment watching Ashley Banfield and Brian Enten while gloating about his successful escape. Clearly he wasn’t receiving ongoing support. Clearly he wasn’t using a burner phone with his mother. Clearly he wasn’t on the Appalachian Trail as I and many others had thought. Clearly Mr. Bertolino was not in contact with him. Clearly his parents were not in contact with him. Clearly there was no other friend helping him. Clearly he wasn’t overseas. Clearly he wasn’t in Mexico. Clearly he wasn’t canoeing around Fort De Soto.

As I have stated before, we always think we know all the answers, until we don’t.

Then we wait five minutes, pretend that our mistakes never happened and begin all over again.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

The Fun in Life

I was a little frustrated today.

I wanted to write something about Gabby and Brian, but there was nothing substantive I could think of.

And so I turned to watching a video of the 1952 World Series between the New York Yankees and the Brooklyn Dodgers.

It’s on YouTube, and I’m not sure if I found the video or the video found me.

Since I was born in 1954, I wanted to take a peek back at the world in which I was born.

What a different world it was.

Of course, my impression was colored, no pun intended, by the video being in black-and-white.

But that’s the way the world was. There was no color television in common use until the early 1960s.

How you see this World Series on YouTube was precisely the way we watched it on television back in the day – grainy black and white and not very sharp at all.

It was an imperfect world by today’s standards.

I can see where young people would sneer at that world.

The baseball diamond in 1952 during that World Series was downright crummy.

The grass was unkempt and the baseball paths were ugly.

The players wore baggy ill-fitting uniforms.

In spite of their rough appearance they played the game with a measure of civility.

I didn’t see any fist pumping or taunting.

The same could be said for the audience who behaved with remarkable civility. There were no fans waving towels around. No one charged out onto the field. I saw no vulgar signs or T-shirts.

What a joy. The fans sat in their seats.

When a foul ball dribbled down the first base line close to the stands, a fan reached down, couldn’t reach the ball, but let it go.

As I watched the video I reflected back to my early years of watching baseball in the 1960s.

I couldn’t remember any baseball brawls.

I’m sure they occurred, but I couldn’t remember any.

It seems logical to me now that what our ancestors, the World War I and II generations, lacked in precision they made up for with civility.

They seemed less judgmental.

The players and fans tended to respect the umpire and his decision. Of course, without the benefit of instant replay, the umpire’s word was gold.

This stands in stark contrast to the world which we now inhabit.

Our baseball diamonds are now immaculately groomed. In many stadiums we don’t even permit grass to exist. After all, grass is imperfect and prone to divots.

The baseball players look much better also.

No longer do we have those baggy uniforms that accentuate the ass. Players look great even if they do have a big ass.

Appearances are much more important these days. Nobody in our era would be caught dead with a big ass, unless of course you’re Bartolo Colón and don’t care anymore.

Unfortunately what we have gained in precision we have lost in civility.

We now live in an age that has zero respect for authority. Nobody respects umpires anymore. The players certainly don’t.

Nowadays, players are regularly tossed out of games. There are also frequent brawls.

It’s as if the precision that we demand in our baseball stadiums and uniforms have carried over to the human beings who inhabit those uniforms.

Of course, the world has changed.

The technology has changed.

After World War II, computers became a force to be reckoned with.

Computers enabled reliable and speedy precision.

This force accelerated as we moved forward into the 60s and 70s. The personal computer put precision and the expectation of precision on steroids.

What we see in the 1952 World Series is the America that existed in the pre-digital age.

The computer permitted us to up our game visually. It made us look better.

Crisp graphics came into our homes with the advent of the personal computer.

We were able to wipe out mistakes immediately with our word processors.

Video analysis on that same computer permitted us to perform better at our jobs.

If we were baseball players, we could analyze our swings and pitches immediately and make corrections.

But there was a downside.

We are humans, not keystrokes on a screen.

We are imperfect creatures.

Imperfect living creatures are not mats of Astro-turf that can be conveniently replaced when a divot appears.

Imperfect human beings require greater care.

Imperfect human beings require tolerance and patience.

Imperfect human beings are emotional and made of carbon; computers display no emotion and are made of silicon.

Carbon is soft; silicon is hard.

Carbon-based forms are susceptible to breakdowns and downtimes. Computers made of silicon chug along with perfection.

The computer and its precision have engendered an expectation amongst the fans that baseball’s players and umpires, imperfect human beings, behave with precision and perfection.

This is not possible.

The frustration of not having their expectations met has led to a boiling rage within fandom.

The fans demand perfection. The fans demand winners and superstars. They will not tolerate anything less.

Their rage boils out into the ether.

A greater incivility then exists within the viewing public. They will now do anything and say anything at a sporting event when the team or player fails to meet their expectations.

They will start fights. They will run out onto the field. They will even kill.

They are frustrated.

The baseball players are not immune from this frustration as they are products of society also.

They too demand perfection of themselves and other players, as do the owners.

You can see where this is leading.

We now live in a society driven by computers that is totally intolerant of humanity.

Sports announcers now call for umpires to be eliminated completely.

Why stop there?

If we can replace umpires, why shouldn’t we replace imperfect players?

I’ll tell you why.

It is the imperfection in humanity which makes it great. It is the mistakes and flaws which make our lives interesting.

It is those bad calls by the umpire that is the stuff of legend.

You can’t have hills without valleys.

A life of perfection is no life at all.

It’s an endless series of home runs and base hits.

It’s boring.

We are machining the imperfection out of society.

We are removing the salt and seasoning from our lives.

What makes the 1952 World Series interesting is its imperfection. The crummy baseball diamond and the baggy big ass uniforms make the game more fun.

And that is what the game is all about.

That is what is missing in our world today.


Baseball isn’t played for fun anymore; it’s played for profits, marketshare, fame, legacy, and bullshit.

It has affected us all for the worse.

Gabby and Brian were part of that society.

They too lived in our world and were not immune to the forces within it.

They felt the pressure of fame as we all do. Gabby wanted to be a YouTube star and Brian was willing to help her.

They weren’t traveling to have fun; they were traveling for all the wrong things in life.

And it was showing. Gabby said as much. She said that behind all the smiling, happy moments of anyone’s video, a shit show was going on behind the scenes.

This was clear for all to see when they got stopped by the police in Moab.

The demands of our modern age were pressing down upon them.

They both wanted more out of life.

They wanted the impossible fantasy life that is paraded before us on the airwaves. They wanted the life of the Kardashians, Beyoncé and Tom Cruise.

They did a good job together, but they were clearly unable to accept the positive aspects of their life while being tolerant of their own and each other’s imperfections.

They were starting out on their grand adventure in life, and so it is sad to see it end in tragedy.

We human beings want happy endings.

We don’t like the story of Romeo and Juliet because it ends in tragedy. But that is precisely why we have watched it all these centuries.

We want that happy ending.

It doesn’t exist, and it can’t exist.

But we want it all the same.

Perhaps in a better world, one more tolerant and forgiving, we, along with Gabby and Brian, will find it.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Brian’s Destiny

What will be the end for Brian Laundrie?

How will we discover him?

If the case of Elisa Lam is a guide, we will find him by accident.

Elisa Lam was the young girl who died at the Cecil Hotel in Los Angeles.

Initially felt to be the victim of an attack, Elisa Lam, it was concluded, had psychiatric problems.

She had climbed to the top of the Cecil Hotel to hide within a water storage tank. She had been hallucinating.

Unfortunately the tank was filled with water. The lid closed over her after she climbed into the tank, and she drowned.

She was discovered much later when the water coming out of the tank began seeping brown liquid through the hotel’s plumbing.

The brown liquid was produced by her decomposing body.

The case of Elisa Lam is a good study in media exuberance in getting things wrong.

In trying to catch the perpetrator, a young death metal singer from Mexico was accused.

As it turned out, he wasn’t even staying in the hotel when Elisa Lam went missing.

This meant little to Internet sleuths who destroyed his career and psyche.

We all think that we are smart.

We all think we are the smartest guy in the room. If we didn’t we wouldn’t write things down on paper. Or make videos.

Humility is a farce. It’s a cover we give ourselves to mask our internal arrogance and high opinion of ourselves.

This would be okay if people didn’t get hurt in the process. Unfortunately it leads to exuberance, overthinking and cocksure-ness.

Thus the protesters outside Brian Laundrie’s house.

They know for sure that’s the Laundries are hiding Brian.

John Walsh, the media celebrity, is convinced that the Laundrie family is still helping Brian.

Why they would be able to get away with this when the FBI is most likely monitoring their phone conversations is never explained.

John Walsh has much influence.

Clearly he has inflamed his followers who now stand outside the Laundrie house with bullhorns to harass the family.

They carry signs that say “Dirty Laundries.” This is a moniker that John Walsh peddles everywhere.

But is it likely that the Laundrie family is still helping Brian?


Is it likely that they helped Brian?


Is it likely that Brian would have followed any advice they would have given?

Assuming that Brian is delusional, probably not.

Then why did he move away from his parents house? What is going on in his mind?

He’s moving away from his parents house and evading the police not because he believes that he did anything wrong, but because he believes that the police will hinder him from reconnecting with Gabby.

In his mind Gabby is not dead.

His mind would not be able to handle her death. That’s why he didn’t bury her. You don’t bury people who are alive.

I don’t think there’s any way a delusional Brian would have admitted to killing Gabby to his mother or father.

You would have to postulate that Brian was sane in the manner of Scott Peterson or Chris Watts who did completely conceal their murdered spouses.

But if he was sane, he wouldn’t have left her body out in the open. He wouldn’t have driven the van back to his parents house. He wouldn’t have carried on as if nothing had happened.

It also seems logical to me that if the FBI, after interviewing the Laundrie parents, had felt that the parents knew that Brian had admitted to them that he had killed Gabby, they would have communicated that, off the record, to former FBI agents who would have communicated that to the media.

If the Laundrie parents had helped Brian escape with money or telephonic communication, surely the FBI would know that by now. If they knew that, they would have approached the parents with the evidence and compelled them to change their approach in staying silent.

So why are the Laundries silent if there is nothing damaging for them to admit? This is a fair question. Their silence could easily be a result of fear, shock, and the advice of a defense lawyer. Plus, they aren’t willing to throw away the 23 year investment they have in their son. It could be that they just want to be sure.

Additionally, there is most likely a great deal of denial going on. Like Gabby’s parents, the Laundries have found their world upended. They can’t believe what is happening to them. The world now seems surreal.

No one wants to admit it, but the Laundries are grieving for their son just as Gabby’s family is grieving for her.

In time, though, Brian will be found, and I suspect in an accidental way.

When he is found, it will be in such a manner as to clearly demonstrate that he was mentally ill.

His death will become as big a mystery as was Gabby’s death.

People will be stunned; they will ask why Brian went there or was found there.

It won’t make any sense to the rational mind.

But to the irrational, delusional mind it makes total sense.

Brian is delusional, or, in the vernacular, insane.

Nicole and Joe Schmidt are assuming that Brian is sane because he used Gabby’s credit card, because he drove back to Florida and so forth. This is a common misconception of people suffering a psychosis. People who suffer a psychosis can get through daily events just fine. They still know how to purchase things at the store, fill up the car with gas, eat at a restaurant and so on. Where psychotic patients are different is in what they believe. People in delusional states have fixed false beliefs. They may even hear voices and see things. They may believe that voices on television are messages directed at them. Where Brian is different is that he still believes that Gabby is alive.

Like Elisa Lam, he will seek out a comfort zone. And that is where he will die, or be found.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Brian’s Mind

The most mysterious question about the Petito and Laundrie affair is the question apparently not posed by any of the Laundrie family on September 6 at Fort De Soto: Where is Gabby?

It was the most obvious question to ask.

There were four adults with Brian on that day, and nobody asked where Gabby was?

Gabby never came up?

Nobody talked about Gabby once?

This is difficult to believe.

If my friend Pat shows up without his wife, Mary, at my house, I’m going to ask: Where’s Mary?

Likewise, if Mary shows up as a function, and I don’t see Pat, I am going to ask: Where’s Pat?

Married couples are a team. Engaged couples are a team.

It’s the most natural question to ask.

Not only that, Brian has just returned from the trip of his lifetime, and nobody is going to ask questions about the trip?



Try again.

How is it possible to not ask about Gabby?

Assuming that they didn’t, is it possible that Cassie, her husband, and the Laundrie parents already knew so much about the trip through constant posting, that they didn’t feel the need to talk about the trip?

Or was Cassie warned not to talk to Brian about Gabby by Cassie’s mother who told her that Brian and Gabby had broken up and that this was a sensitive topic that Brian didn’t want to talk about?

This option seems possible but less likely as Cassie comes off as a normal, candid, innocent individual during that brief interview that she conducted outside her house.

I feel confident that if her mother had told her not to bring up Gabby on 6 September Cassie would have revealed this to us.

Unfortunately, this brings us back to square one.

Perhaps Cassie does not recall asking Brian about Gabby.


Or perhaps Cassie did ask Brian about Gabby, and Brian waved her off while walking away.

This option seems possible although, again, Cassie seems forthcoming enough that she would admit this during the interview.

If this is the case then how did the subject of Gabby not come up?

Perhaps Brian spent very little time with Cassie and her husband on that day. Brian is a loner, and so it is possible that he spent the majority of Cassie‘s visit walking around in the woods.

Or perhaps he spent most of the time playing with Cassie‘s children.

This is possible. Loners like Brian feel most comfortable when they are alone. Whereas socializers and extroverts become relaxed around people, introverts and loners become more agitated.

It is possible that Brian had attention deficit disorder. This might explain his penchant for being alone, and his impulsiveness. It also might explain why he gravitated toward the arts.

Individuals with attention deficit disorder who go untreated are generally ostracized from society. They are ostracized because they are flighty and impulsive. Since they can’t do well in school, options are limited for them. If they have not turned to crime, they generally turn to manual labor, acting, singing, or the arts. One doesn’t need to read a book or pass a test to become proficient in these fields.

With ostracism comes low self-esteem and anger. It’s not so much that people with attention deficit disorder do not like people, it’s that normal people do not like them. Social isolation, anger and impulsivity are the ingredients for a life of crime. Almost 2/3 of the men in prison have attention deficit disorder.

Did Brian have attention deficit disorder? It’s possible that he had that and more. Attention deficit disorder rarely occurs by itself. There are often comorbid disorders such as bipolar depression, mania, anxiety and so forth.

We know from one of Brian’s friends in high school that Brian had few friends in junior high school and perhaps two friends in high school. One of those was Gabby Petito.

Perhaps she had found a kindred spirit. It’s even possible that Gabby had attention deficit disorder as well.

What’s striking about Brian’s social history is how few people have come out of the woodwork to say that they were his close friend. Given the wide exposure of this case, it’s extremely unlikely that any of his close friends would remain reticent.

I think it’s safe to assume that Brian had few friends. Again, this might be a clue that Brian did have attention deficit disorder.

People with attention deficit disorder learn by osmosis to stay away from other people. Since they have been hurt by other people so many times, they internally rationalize that it’s better to be safe than it is to be exposed and hurt. They often don’t understand what it is about themselves that leads people to bully or hurt them; they just know that there’s something different about themselves.

Given all that, it is highly likely that Brian stayed away from Cassie and her husband during the visit on 6 September at Fort DeSoto.

The ADHD mind doesn’t work like the normal mind. Whereas the brain of a noted extrovert, Bill Clinton, will become more relaxed when more people walk into the room, the mind of an individual who has attention deficit disorder will become more disorganized as more people walk into the room.

I can tell you from personal experience with my own ADHD, that my mind is fine when I am conversing with people one-on-one, or even one-on-two, or one-on-three, but when a larger group of people begin to come into the room, my mind becomes more disorganized. I have to find refuge. I have to either walk out of the room, or retreat into my own thoughts.

I need one-on one interaction. If I can’t have that, my mind will become a total FUBAR.

Cassie can tell us best what Brian was like as a child.

Did he like nature and natural settings? Apparently so. Was he good at relating to children? Cassie thought so.

This isn’t surprising to me. Natural settings are quiet and don’t talk back. Children are trusting and non-judgmental. It takes learning to become an adult who inflicts pain.

Brian would have learned this all by himself just by living.

It wouldn’t surprise me at all to learn that he spent the entire six hours that day on 6 September playing with Cassie’s children in the woods.

The woods are safe.

Children are safe.

Children are trusting.

There in the woods, with Cassie’s children, who are friendly and innocent, Brian can retreat into his own world and be safe.

There in the refuge in his fortress of solitude no one is going to ask questions.

No one’s going to ask where Gabby is.

No one needs to know, he reasons.

What he believes is enough.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Where is Brian Laundrie?

So where is Brian Laundrie?

The screaming mobs of Barabbas led by the popular John Walsh have given us “solid tips” that lead just about everywhere except possibly the truth.

John Walsh labels the Laundries as the “dirty laundries.” He repeats this moniker as much as he possibly can.

He incites hatred against them. It’s gotten to the point where people now place empty laundry baskets on the Laundrie yard.

Mr. Walsh accuses the Laundries of currently aiding and abetting their son, although it’s difficult to understand how they could possibly do so given current FBI scrutiny.

Not to be out done by himself, Mr. Walsh goes one step further by accusing the Laundrie attorney, Mr. Bertolino, of aiding Brian Laundrie. Really? Are attorneys legally allowed to do this? I doubt it.

Today, John Walsh believes that Brian Laundrie is in Mexico. He states that his father Chris Laundrie probably drove him there. What’s left out of this belief is why John Walsh would believe this.

What does Chris Laundrie know about the Mexican border? Has he ever been down here to the border? How would he know where to cross? And where is the evidence that Chris Laundrie drove his car to the Rio Grande Valley which would be the closest border crossing to where he lives in Florida? Does Brian speak Spanish?

In a medium obsessed with immediacy, these questions are never addressed, and they never need to be. Mr. Walsh has undoubtedly learned over the years that Americans don’t ask a lot of questions.

This has engendered a mental laziness in people who regularly appear on the media. They have learned that you don’t have to back up your suppositions with any facts or solid logical reasoning; on the other hand, you get better ratings when you don’t ask questions, when you leap around from one baseless supposition to the next.

But, these are “solid tips” we are reminded.

Why they are “solid tips,” other than someone’s random thought, we are never told.

The other “solid tip” according to John Walsh is that Brian took a ferry to the Bahamas.

Again, we are not given any solid logical reasoning as to why this may have happened.

Now, if you had told me that Chris Laundrie grew up in the Bahamas, that he had family in the Bahamas, or a condo in the Bahamas, or that the Laundries have fished down in the Bahamas, it might be a solid tip.

But a solid tip is not made solid by someone calling it solid.

I’m not asking for hard evidence like a photograph or a receipt. Sound logical reasoning is enough to make it more solid, to be worth pursuing.

Meanwhile, as the baseless blather dominates the airwaves, more responsible thinking gets ignored.

Such as?

There is much evidence out there to suggest that Brian Laundrie is truly delusional. We can cite his behavior, Gabby’s friend’s testimony that Brian was hearing voices, and the most credible sighting of Dennis Davis who stated that Brian was not all there. We also have the statement of Miranda Baker who felt that Brian was, again, not all there.

Piecing this together with Brian’s experience on the Appalachian Trail, it makes a lot more sense that Brian is on the Appalachian Trail, in a confused delusional state.

If Brian is still alive, which is doubtful although possible, it is probably because he has discovered safe sanctuary there in the Appalachians, a small fortress of solitude that he chanced upon during prior visits.

Like Elisa Lam, who found sanctuary in the water tower atop the Hotel Cecil, Brian is more likely than not hiding in a refuge that he finds will give him the greatest comfort.

In a sense, he has found his Pitcairn island, a sanctuary not found on the maps of the world.

If he cannot find his way back to California safely to meet Gabby who he still believes is alive, he will remain there until he dies.

Someday, like Elisa Lam, he will be discovered by accident.

At that point we will come to understand that Brian was not of sane mind.

Of course, this will be disclosed quietly to the public. In the years to come the media will be obsessed with a new case. There will be new screaming mobs, new baseless suppositions, and new public spectacles.

Television demands it.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Why the Laundrie Parents Did Not Know

There has been much speculation since the beginning of this case involving Gabby Petito that the Laundrie parents were helping their son escape.

While that might be true on some level at a later point in time, perhaps 11 September, they certainly did not know or suspect that Brian had killed Gabby when Brian returned on 1 September. They also did not know or suspect on 6 September.

Had they known or suspected that their son had killed Gabby Petito on 6 September, they never would have permitted Cassie, Brian’s sister, and her husband, and their kids, to meet with them or Brian that weekend.

Cassie, their daughter would have detected that something was wrong based upon her parents behavior. Their body language would have given them away.

That Cassie did not detect anything out of the ordinary, that Cassie was invited to the gathering at Fort De Soto on 6 September indicates that the parents did not know that Brian had killed Gabby.

If we now suspect the parents of crafty, diabolical behavior, then we would also have to conclude that they began planning Brian’s escape far before the Petito family reported Gabby as missing.

Ergo, the Laundries would have removed Brian from the house long before 13 September. We can’t have our cake and eat it too. We can’t assume that they are diabolical one moment and not diabolical the next.

Now, of course we can argue that people are not diabolical until they need to be. Assuming then, that the Laundries are diabolical, then what does it say that they did not move Brian away from the house immediately on 1 or 6 September. It tells me that they did not suspect that Brian had killed Gabby or that anything was amiss.

It suggests that Brian was telling them a story. We have to conclude that they would naturally have asked where Gabby was. A mother is pretty good at picking up when her son is lying. If Brian was of sane mind and was intentionally lying, his mother would have picked up on that. That she did not, indicates that Brian was delusional. Brian truly believed that Gabby was still alive.

So when did the Laundries first suspect that something was amiss. Probably when the police came to the door on 11 September. When the police showed up to report Gabby as missing, his parents most likely asked Brian again what was going on. Brian in his delusional state probably told them what he believed to be true, that Gabby was visiting a friend and that Gabby was okay. He probably reassured his parents. Since Brian appeared so believable to them, they probably believed him. After all, their son had never killed anyone before that they knew of. Plus, this was their son.

Most likely the Laundries trusted their son. This would be the natural inclination of any parent.

When Brian told his parents that he was going to hike through the Carlton Reserve a few days later, they probably didn’t think anything of it. What would cause them to believe that their son was going to run away.

Additionally, Brian’s parents had invested 23 years in their sons life. Their minds were not going to permit them to throw that away on a lark.

Now, Dog the Bounty Hunter has stated that he thinks that Brian called his parents the night he killed Gabby.

This does not seem logical. If this were the case, one would have to believe that a more logical plan would have developed. Certainly, his father would have given him better advice than to drive the van back to Florida without Gabby.

Certainly his father would have told him to at least bury the body.

Likewise, had his parents known that he was guilty of killing Gabby, they certainly wouldn’t have invited his sister, Cassie, to a family outing at Fort De Soto. When pulling off a crime successfully, you want to involve as few people as possible. You don’t want anyone suspecting anything.

If that is the case, then why were the Laundries ready with a lawyer on September 11?

I suspect because Chris (or Roberta) Laundrie had known this lawyer before, or they were referred to Mr. Bertolino by a friend or by another lawyer they had used. Additionally, Chris and Roberta Laundrie were older and more experienced than your average bear. It is true that anything you say can and will be used against you. Defense attorneys will generally tell their clients to say nothing to the police. The problem isn’t that Chris Laundrie and his wife chose a defense attorney. The problem is that they chose a defense attorney who is tone deaf.

That they haven’t fired Mr. Bertolino by now is indicative of their stunned confusion by the events that have transpired over the past month. They can’t see what the rest of us can.

Of course, there is always the option that the entire Laundrie family is diabolical and clever and that they are feigning a front of cluelessness all the while hiding Brian in a secret location. In other words, we would be concluding that the whole family is a Manson gang of murderers who have killed before and will kill again. This option seems not viable.

The remaining option is that Brian confessed to his parents that he killed Gabby after the police showed up on 11 September. This does not seem logical as it would indicate that Brian was a person of sane mind who had accidentally killed out of passion. Had he been of that mindset, he never would have been able to fool his parents or his sister (and her husband) on 6 September.

Had he been that type of killer, his parents would have instructed him to confess the crime to the police as this would not be a crime that would warrant the death penalty. Of course, his parents could have given him bad advice under stress. It is possible they could have enabled him to escape. But this is predicated upon Brian being of sane mind which the evidence does not support.

Additionally, the fact that that Brian did not bury the body is indicative of a delusional state. Brian did not bury the body because he believes that Gabby is alive.

The argument that moving the body constitutes concealment is rejected. Sane people move and hide the body. People of unhealthy mind do not. Why would you bury someone who is alive?


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

My Lawn, My Rules

Imagine you are a protester outside the Laundrie house. Imagine you are standing on the Laundrie yard.

The other day, two protesters from across the street where Brian and Gabby lived tacked up a sign for Gabby on the Laundrie yard.

The sign said: “Remember me? I lived with you.” There was a picture of Gabby.

There are other protesters as well. People are walking up and down the street with bullhorns screaming at the Laundries to come out of their house and break their silence.

One particular individual yelled: “Answer America’s questions!”

Overhead, a plane carried a sign in support of Gabby. It read: “End the Silence. Justice for Gabby.“

This is the state of affairs in the United States of America.

This is the circus that exists.

Now, let’s get back to you. Let’s imagine that you are a protester from Seattle who has driven to the Laundrie House to protest.

Why are you there?

I’m going to pretend that I am in the Laundrie house, and that I’ve come out of the house to reason with you.

I’m sorry, but it’ll just be me talking. I’ll answer your questions after you listen to me.

Well, sir, where did you come from now? You came from Seattle? How far is that? 2545 miles?

And you came here all this way to do what?

To protest?

Do you know why you’re here?

Since you came such a long distance, I don’t want to disappoint you. I’m going to tell you why you’re here.

It has to do with that little cell phone that you are carrying in your hand.

Prior to 1980, before cell phones, before computers, life was a little tougher. It was a different world.

It was better in that it was more tolerant, but it was worse in that it was more cumbersome.

We did a lot of things on foot, hand and paper.

In order to learn, we might have to walk to the library. When we got to the library, we would have to look up the books we wanted in a card catalogue and then physically go get it. Many times we had no idea what we were looking for, so we had to track down the librarian who could help us find it. She was our search engine.

It was all organized according to a scheme called the Dewey decimal system which seems to have gone out the window. Now we just type in the book that we want on a search engine, and it pops up.

We don’t even have to hold a heavy book anymore. Every book weighs the same on your iPad.

Things weren’t instantly at our fingertips either. Nor was there the volume of information that we have today. But that wasn’t so bad. Generally, the people who wrote books or who wrote articles were professionals who knew what they were doing. So you didn’t have to wade through a lot of garbage.

If we wanted to take a picture, we had to lug out the camera, go to the store to buy some film, take the pictures, then take the film back to a photo store where it would be developed. We then stored the pictures in a large book which we would call a photo album. We’d have to find a place in the house to keep it. There weren’t a lot of pictures by today’s standards because shooting and developing pictures cost money. Nowadays, we might snap twenty-five pictures in a few seconds.

If we wanted to write a book, we had to go buy a yellow pad and a pen, write it all down, then store those papers in a folder in the house so that we could return to it. If we typed it out and made a mistake, we had to go get some correcting tape and type over the letter that got messed up. We might even have to start all over again with a fresh page in the typewriter. Sometimes the ribbon in the typewriter had lousy ink, and so we had to go buy a new ribbon. All these inconveniences forced us to think before we wrote or typed.

To find out what was going on, we waited for either the morning or evening newspaper. Where I lived in Philadelphia, there were two papers. The morning paper was the Inquirer; the afternoon paper was the Bulletin. The news on TV generally came on at 6 and 11 on the East Coast. There was no 24 hour news cycle. There was no cable TV. A lot of stuff was learned by word-of-mouth. I found out about the Kennedy assassination from a boy in my sisters class. He told me as soon as I got out of school on that Friday afternoon. I was nine years old.

Generally speaking, life was a pain in the ass.

In 1980 all of that changed. This was when the personal computer came into the main stream.

Our world was going to be fundamentally transformed for the better and the worse.

The computer was sold, and still is sold, as a life transforming device. Our productivity was going to increase; we were all going to become more powerful.

That’s what Microsoft told us.

We were deluded into believing that we could all become best selling authors. We could now self-publish with our new word processors. The typewriter was thrown out the window. We wouldn’t be making any mistakes anymore. Why, in short order we were going to be the new Ernest Hemingways. Plus writing was much easier. We didn’t have to think too much before writing because we could just erase it and start all over without any penalty.

Not only were we going to be best-selling authors, we were also going to be the next Ansel Adams. Our computers were going to be able to manipulate the images in order to produce award-winning pictures. Hell, why stop at Ansel Adams? We were going to be the next Stanley Kubrick as well. Our video-editing programs were empowering us.

It certainly seemed possible, but why would we believe this?

Why would we believe that we could write with the talent of Scott Fitzgerald? Why would we believe that we could take professional photographs that would hang in galleries? Why would we believe that we could make videos and movies that could rival Scorsese and Coppola?

We believed we could because the technology of the computer beguiled us. With its reliable precision and it’s crisp graphics, at our fingertips, under our control, we were bewitched into thinking that we were the ones who were in control of the computer.

But we were not. The computer had reached out to control us.

In short order, we fooled ourselves into a false state of omnipotence. We became more cocksure of ourselves. We were certain now that we had answers that other people did not. Tolerance and respect for others was lost.

It became common for people to call into talk shows where you could hear comments very similar to this: “Not too many people know this, but … the sun rises in the east and sets in the west.”

The call-in radio shows were the forerunners of the public chat rooms and forums. These in turn were the forerunners of social media.

With social media, you can broadcast your message to the world. And with YouTube, if it goes viral, the whole world sees and hears your magnificent thoughts.

Going viral is an intoxicating idea.

It’s like gasoline.

Who doesn’t enjoy watching gasoline explode, especially if you are the center of attention?

This is why you are here, Mr. Protester. This is why you are outside my house. You have all the answers, and you have been cruelly led to believe this.

I’m sorry to disappoint you.

You are not the next Hemingway. You are not the next Ansel Adams. You are not even Sherlock Holmes.

You’re not any of these people because you don’t do the thinking and the hard work that goes in to achieving greatness. Hemingway was a great writer because he dedicated himself over decades. Ansel Adams was a great photographer because he thought about what he was doing. He didn’t shoot from the hip. He asked questions, something you manifestly refuse to do.

The cell phone that you carry has bewitched you. It has given you a false sense of power and greatness about yourself. This in turn has led to arrogance, and this arrogance has in turn engendered boldness, imprudence, and ignorance within you. You don’t know all the facts. You only think you know all the facts.

The main stream media has egged you on by creating a circus atmosphere of intolerance.

Rage is the order of the day.

Far from making our lives better, the personal computer has made it worse in many ways.

Social media on our cell phones along with instant messaging now brings rage and streetside justice within our grasp.

And there is plenty to be angry about because the computer revolution has engendered a polarization of wealth in society that grows by leaps and bounds.

Computer technology has worked against the average American economically. Wall street hucksters using high-frequency trading and fast networks can now fleece you of your money (while you sleep) more easily than a card shark at a Vegas gaming table.

Large corporations using computer technology can now shift your mind into buying more things that you neither need nor can pay for. They can nickel and dime you without you even knowing. And the payments you make never need to be sent in. They can be directly fleeced from your bank account monthly in such minuscule amounts that you will hardly notice.

Consequently, finances are tight for you. You feel a little rage, but your rage is not directed at the leaders who have failed to control Wall Street and large corporations.

Oh, no.

Your rage is directed elsewhere. It is directed elsewhere because the same people who control the large corporations and Wall Street, have used computer technology to shift your rage.

Thus the Gabby Petito story.

The Gabby Petito story is front page news because the elites want it to be front page news.

They don’t want you angry about COVID-19, masks, Middle East wars and government corruption. And they sure as sugar don’t want you protesting in a mob on the national mall.

They want you here focused on me.

That’s why you are here on my front lawn.

In summary, your leadership has created a New World Order that doesn’t work for you. Our leaders have hurt you economically. They cheat you out of your money on a daily basis. To prevent you from directing your rage at them, they, using their computer algorithms that display the stories on Google News, redirect your anger toward me, or the next circus of the week. And, of course, they have given you the false sense of omnipotence about yourself in order to prosecute that rage.

My advice to you would be to take back your life. If it’s possible, get rid of all the apps on your cell phone. Use a phone for what it’s meant for. Quit watching main stream television as much as you possibly can. Reserve a time of the day when you will look at the news. Return to reading books. Begin asking more questions in your life. Develop a sense of tolerance toward others. Act more humbly.

Finally, get the hell off my lawn.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved

Brian Laundrie’s Mental Health

I have a theory.

Suppose that Brian Laundrie is delusional.

I don’t mean that in a casual sense. I mean that in the very specific psychiatric sense of the word.

Suppose he’s truly experiencing a psychotic crisis.

If so, he needs help.

Perhaps Gabby Petito was starting to realize that before Brian killed her.

Brian Laundrie’s actions make little sense to a rational person.

Rational people don’t do the things that he did.

Not even rational people who kill their spouses for money make these kinds of mistakes.

Let’s proceed with this theory and pretend that Brian is delusional.

If you took a trip with your spouse to Wyoming and then killed her there, would you drive your car back to your parent’s house in her car?

Most people wouldn’t do that.

Most people would come up with a better plan.

Since he didn’t, it’s logical that he lied to his parents when he arrived back home. That approach would be more consistent with a compromised mind.

I doubt seriously that he said: Hey mom, hey dad, I’m mentally ill and I killed Gabby. Can you help me?

He might have told his parents when they asked where Gabby was that he dropped her off at a friends house in, say, Illinois. Or Missouri. He may have added to the lie by telling them that she was planning to spend a few days there before visiting her parents in New York.

Operating under the current assumption that his parents are helping him, had Brian, sane or insane, told his parents the truth, being rational parents, they probably would have told him to ditch the van.

That the car wasn’t ditched loans support to the idea that Brian lied to them.

That they did not suspect that he was lying loans support to the idea that Brian was truly delusional.

Delusional people are remarkably effective at convincing people.

Occasional liars aren’t skilled enough and often reveal their lies through body language. Or they become tripped up by offering an inconsistent or implausible story upon repeated questioning.

It’s safe to say that his parents asked him where Gabby was.

His sister, Cassie, was thoroughly convinced that nothing was amiss. She met with Brian and her parents for six hours on September 6th and never suspected a thing.

Brian apparently was acting quite normally. He was interacting with Cassie’s children as if nothing had happened.

We have a picture of Brian and Cassie’s kids at Fort De Soto. So effective was Brian’s delusion that Cassie’s husband suspected nothing as well.

If Cassie had suspected that something was wrong, if she knew or felt that Brian had harmed Gabby, would she seriously allow her brother to play with her children?

Brian’s demeanor at Fort DeSoto was nothing short of creepy. Clearly something is wrong here. Brian has not heard from his girlfriend for nine days (because he most likely killed her on 8/28/21), and he is acting as if it’s another day in the park.

We know this because the people closest to him, the people who know him, suspect that nothing is amiss.

They don’t suspect anything because Brian in his delusional mind has convinced himself that Gabby is not dead. When you are selling a story to someone, you first have to sell yourself.

(As a quick aside, didn’t Dennis Davis tell us that the man in Appalachia, who he thought was Brian, was trying to get to his girlfriend in California?)

Had Brian been of sane mind, the stress of killing Gabby would have manifested itself through his body language in ways that would make people suspect that something was wrong.

But he was not of healthy mind.

Brian‘s delusional behavior didn’t begin the minute he killed Gabby; his delusional behavior was apparent weeks before.

On August 17th Brian flew back to Florida from Salt Lake City in order to retrieve some items from his storage shed because ostensibly he and Gabby were planning to prolong their trip.

For five days from August 17 to August 22, Brian was in Florida while Gabby remained in Utah.

This is strange behavior reflective of unclear thinking. The airline ticket will cost approximately $500; to house Gabby in a motel for five days will cost at least another $500. A clear and rational person would understand that it’s cheaper to purchase the items in a local Walmart then it is to go home to Florida to retrieve items.

And what items could possibly be retrieved that would make the trip back to Florida essential?

A kayak? Please.

A gun? Drugs?

Only an irrational person would try to sneak drugs and a gun through airport security.

At this point, Gabby must have begun to realize that something was seriously wrong with Brian.

When he returned, his irrational behavior continued when he got into the argument at the Merry Piglets restaurant.

For Gabby to come back into the restaurant and apologize, the argument must have been unworldly.

Nina Angelo, a diner in the restaurant, stated that Brian’s behavior “freaked her out.”

Most likely this was the straw that broke the camel’s back in Brian’s mind. Brian, in a delusional and paranoid state of mind, viewed Gabby as a traitor, killed her, dumped her body, then drove back to Florida as if nothing had happened. Then, in the ensuing days, convinced himself within the twisted thinking of a psychotic state that Gabby was not dead.

When he arrived at his parents house, he didn’t run. He carried on with his life as if everything was normal. This is not what normal people do when they kill their spouse or fiancé.

Brian in his delusional mind had convinced himself that Gabby was alive.

Or he seriously thought he was in the clear.

Did he seriously believe that Gabby’s family would sit back and do nothing? Apparently he must have. Why not? In his mind Gabby was not dead.

When Dennis Davis ran across a man who resembled Brian just a few days ago on the Appalachian Trail, he confirmed Brian’s delusional status, assuming that this was Brian, by stating that he was “talking wild” and “acting funny.”

Dennis Davis stated that the man wanted to take the back roads to California in order to meet up with his girlfriend. Of course, that is laughably absurd. There are no back roads to California.

It would be equally absurd for him to get back to Gabby who is dead.

This is indicative of a person who is mentally imbalanced in a true medical sense.

Also indicative of a man in psychiatric crisis, assuming that this was Brian, is that Brian only got as far as Tennessee in a two-week period of time. This is reflective of a person with disorganized thinking.

If this is the case, and Brian is delusional, then he is extremely dangerous. Most likely he is hearing voices. And those voices will tell him to kill again just as those voices may have told him to kill Gabby.

I suspect he is experiencing a true psychiatric crisis.

What could have triggered this? It’s difficult to say, but it would certainly be helpful to know Brian‘s past psychological history.

Was he ever admitted to a behavioral health center? Has he ever seen a psychologist or a psychiatrist? Were there any warning signs in his early life of a troubled personality? Did he ever attempt to inflict harm on small animals? What is his criminal record? What do his friends from grade school say about his personality? What about his work life? Was he able to hold down a job? Did he have a job? Was he taking medications currently or in the past? Was he displaying any symptoms indicative of a neurological disease? What is his past medical history? Was he an abuser of drugs? Since they were traveling in peyote country, had they picked up peyote along the way? How about ayahuasca?

Given that both Brian and Gabby were neo-hippies (outdoorsy, organic, nature type people), is it possible that Brian was ingesting seeds that he thought were safe but were instead toxic? Is it possible that he was unwittingly ingesting jimsonweed which can cause anxiety, agitation, paranoia, hallucinations and psychotic episodes?

These are important questions to answer because Brian Laundrie’s choices don’t seem consistent with a rational mind as we know it.


Archer Crosley

Copyright 2021 Archer Crosley All Rights Reserved