Replies

"If Remington has really been in the slammer on the bank robbery case since Nov. of 2001--and I know you have your doubts about that--then he's already built up a year or so of credit against whatever sentence he got, or will get, for the bank robbery."

Remington was in jail since the November 2001 Sandy bank robbery.

Ricci admitted to the Adams burglary and Smart theft on June 15th and consented to a search of his property which took place on June 19th -- which is when they found some of the items stolen in these thefts. Young was questioned by authorities on July 2nd and Remington on July 3rd. The burglary charges against Ricci were then announced around July 17th. Remington entered a guilty plea to the Sandy bank robbery in October and was sentenced December 18th to a 5 year term. The judge said he provided "substantial assistance" in the Smart case, though the prosecutor said none of it was related to Ricci or the kidnapping.

My assumption was the same as yours -- that Remington and his lawyer saw an opportunity to strike a deal when questioned by officials, and did. Sherlock's scenario makes sense as well -- although, since Remington was already being held in jail for the bank robbery, and obviously had not ratted on Young or Ricci in the 9 months he'd been in there -- I'm not sure why he would be offended by police approaching him with questions about working in the Federal Heights neighborhood. Remington's alibi for Elizabeth's kidnapping was airtight.

Yes, I remember seeing those SLC jail booking sheets (on some other forum, later posted on ours) and it said Remington was picked up the same day, or shortly after, the bank robbery. (I assume the feds pay for the county jail to hold federal prisoners as well as their usual prisoners.)

Sherlock has some doubts, thinking that Remington may have somehow been out of jail around the time of Elizabeth's kidnapping. I haven't heard of anything to point to that, but truth is stranger than fiction, so anything is possible. But the booking sheets don't support this idea.

Now, when you say Remington provided substantial assistance, but none of it related to Ricci or the kidnapping, do you mean none of it related to ANY (non-kidnapping) criminal activities of Ricci's? I am thinking you meant to say, none of Remington's info related to Ricci's suspected involvement in the kidnapping, but some of it related to Ricci's involvement in the Sandy bank robbery. ? If I'm thinking wrong, let me know!

As for Ricci mentioning Remington's and Young's work with him in Federal Hts., maybe Remington was angry that anyone would even place him in the neighborhood of this sensational disappearance, even though the informant was talking about a time much earlier than the time Elizabeth went missing.