Missing hiker (Monica Reza)

[GoalHiking]

The thing is is that the yoga group that subjects A, B, and C are in is literally a cult...

This and the Reddit post shed a whole new light on this issue.

Given the general incompetence of governments at all levels, I hope no one is assuming the FBI already knows about something. Anyone who has insider info or documented research should call the FBI. Also, since this is a public thread, people shouldn't mention what they talked to the FBI about.

[HikeUp]

o6veija.jpg

[Tob]

This meditation thing makes me wonder if they engaged in any mind-enhancing substances on the summit.

I did consider that, initially because I would be inclined to believe something like that vs a uti or a brain bleed/infarct, simply because a uti would be much slower to develop and both hikers would have noticed signs of confusion from her (which maybe they did but I hadn't heard that yet.) Most strokes present with some degree of motor and coordination deficit, not always but typically. I just feel in both those scenarios, I would expect to hear something along the lines to where Hiker A and Hiker C (or just Hiker A later on) earlier on in the trip having noticed Monica was "off" somehow at some point leading up to her disappearance. But that would be a very odd thing for her companions to omit from the story.

However, conversely, for what should be obvious reasons, I could definitely see a scenario where the people she was with now feel the urge to not disclose those details if in fact Monica was under the influence of mind altering substances. That is much more believable in terms of considering potential external factors impacting her decisions when trying to make sense how she lost her way. I guess the next step would be to determine if that group was known to partake in those types of extracurricular activities, or if there's any history of that with the group? I mean from what it sounds like, that activity does seem to fit the mold of what you would expect from a group that seems cultish but to just assume that without an established history isn't exactly fair to them.

Thats definitely an interesting angle and could explain some things but it doesn't really explain the main issue which is why couldn't they find her? And again to reiterate, I'm not saying in like a "I refuse to believe that its possible that they couldn't find her for any other reason than foul play" way either, just to be clear. I'm very aware and open like I've been saying to the possibility that its
more likely than a non-hiker like myself would be accustomed to for her to completely disappear on a mountain like Mt Waterman that quickly in the presence of a search and helicopters, without being found. I just mean in the sense there's an offhand smaller chance that there is some non-hiker centric explanation for her having vanished.

Also, and maybe I'm being a little tinfoily here, so feel free to mock me for what I am about to suggest but do you feel like Monica looks different in the picture where she's walking at a distance? Its very pixelated and I'm sure that's why. I mean its clearly her, I'm not suggesting that it isn't or anything like that. The other two pictures of her from that day she looks exactly like the Monica from the Yoga video but that one where she's walking to me she just looks slightly different. Probably nothing but I just wondered if anyone did a double take like I did.

[Sean]

InShot_20260507_051734605.jpg

[David R]

Also, and maybe I'm being a little tinfoily here, so feel free to mock me for what I am about to suggest but do you feel like Monica looks different in the picture where she's walking at a distance?

I think you're on to something, what if Monica Reza never went on the hike? If the two people she hiked with were paid off by agents of a foreign government it is possible that this was the cover up while they absconded her earlier. An agent from China who was Caucasian dressed up as Monica did the hike, she took off her costume, hid out and was later picked up by the two paid informants. The actual kidnapping happened the night before and Monica was smuggled onto the Beijing Star which was leaving the port of Long Beach that next day. Everyone is looking for Monica in the mountains but in actuality she was on the slow ship to China.

[Sean]

I searched the internets for images from the Beijing Star that day. Didn't find anything. But a friend of my barber's cousin's step-brother was on that ship and said he saw someone matching Monica's description!!!!!!!!!!

[SideQuestHiker]

Meanwhile...I posted an ambient hike video (the main reason for my YouTube channel) that is somewhat relevant to Monica's disappearance. It will give you another look at the area where Monica went missing. This is the Three Points-Mt Waterman trail that goes along the south flank of the ridge where Monica went missing. I filmed this back in March before I became interested in Monica's disappearance and therefore doesn't focus on her story. I added timecodes in the description so people can jump to those parts of the video that are relevant to her disappearance.



As you go along the trail you can see how some of the slope is dense brush, other parts fairly open pine forest. Some parts of the trail are easy to see and other parts, not so easy. You can also see boulder piles that can have crevasses and/or cave-like spaces where a body could remain hidden. Keep in mind when watching, the storms we had back in December changed things a bit, too. More washed out trail sections and WAY more blowdowns.

[AW~]

If the two people she hiked with were paid off by agents of a foreign government it is possible that this was the cover up while they absconded her earlier...

No doubt you are refereeing to the people in robes...I was hoping no one would go there "We could see clearly better who were holding the lanterns, the light was bigger than before. We saw one person wearing black robes with pointy hat and four others wearing the classic white robes. They were ahead of us by maybe 30 to 50 yards. So I told everyone to run back as fast as they can, I think they saw us or heard us because they started to shout that they were going catch us and hang us in that big tree on the trail."

[coloradohiker]

Meanwhile...I posted an ambient hike video (the main reason for my YouTube channel) that is somewhat relevant to Monica's disappearance.

Another great video. Proves a video is worth 1,000 pictures and all that. What impressed me most was the scope, the difficulty, the immensity of the surroundings. I'm 79 years old and definitely not up to taking these hikes on. My wife and I do 2-3 hikes/week in the foothills of the Rockies, but it's way tamer than anything like this. I was considering asking a couple of younger friends who are rock climbers to go out & give it a shot. They could do the cliffs in Eldorado Canyon near Boulder, Colorado at night in the rain with 40 mph winds. You can't always trust the info online, but I've read that there was no detection of a mountain lion in the area where the 2 hikers heard a woman screaming. If so, that must have been Monica, and she must have taken a left when reaching the trail you profile in the video. If course, that makes no sense, just as taking a left up top makes no sense. All the explanations for that left turn are, in my opinion, problematic. Maybe the beanie is a plant, but if the woman screaming is a woman and not a lion, who could it be except Monica? I take it that the area near the Twin Peaks Saddle has been searched less than Devils Canyon. Do you think it would be worthwhile to search that area? It must be incredibly frustrating for you and many of the hikers in this forum, who have spent so much effort in searching for Monica, not to be getting any feedback from officialdom. The Tips Line has been functioning for months. We need an update.

[Ry_Ky]

Hi, new to the forum, not in SoCal (I wish!), I've been following Monica's case since the week she went missing because I do search and rescue and someone who knew Monica told me about her.

Unfortunately with my SAR career, I can't help out in any official capacity unless called in an official capacity so ... that's my disclaimer. Take these as Internet musings from someone who has searched in the woods for folks and has planned searches. Willing to help out in an unofficial capacity as long as that's taken as such. As well as answer general questions related to SAR (and how hard it can be to find someone in the wilderness even with organized search efforts).

Thank you for the videos, SideQuestHiker. I'm still working through all of them. Thanks for noting the part of the Mt. Waterman Trail that was below where her beanie was found, I had been thinking about that section. Do you think she would have recognized it as a trail if/when she came to it? From the videos, I can see that it can be really hard to tell where the trail is sometimes, and easy to miss.

Hearing that there have been big storms in the past few months does not bode well. Landslides, mudslides, debris, deadfall, etc may have buried her remains.

I agree that the area around the Mt. Waterman Trail towards the Twin Peaks saddle point should be / should have been searched more, though we don't know what SAR did officially. Looks like there are more gaps in search coverage there, at least in the volunteer searchers' map (but some sections are very steep and probably impassable on foot). coloradohiker, where did you read that no mountain lions were detected near Twin Peaks at that time? I remember reading that FLIR caught bears and mountain lions, though that was likely at night. If it wasn't a mountain lion, it has the potential to be a lead indicating that she did travel towards Twin Peaks.

Also, it's possible she could have got onto the Mt. Waterman Trail and later accidentally got off the trail again. From SideQuestHiker's video, seems to be a pretty gnarly trail at times.

Also, just wanted to say in general that when people are lost and panicking, they make choices that can seem really strange and confusing. I worked a search once where the subject had crashed his car on the highway, ran off, and went missing. I thought for sure that he would be in the wooded median, or the woods off to the side of where he crashed. No -- he crossed several lanes of fast traffic to end up on the other side of the highway.

So when I think about the path that a missing person may have taken, I try to apply logic but also remember that logic can get thrown out of the window.

[SideQuestHiker]

What impressed me most was the scope, the difficulty, the immensity of the surroundings.

Yeah, when you're out there the search area looks so much bigger than it does on maps!

[SideQuestHiker]

Do you think she would have recognized it as a trail if/when she came to it? From the videos, I can see that it can be really hard to tell where the trail is sometimes, and easy to miss.

I suppose it all depends on her state of mind. If she was stumbling down the south slope in a panic she could have easily missed it. On the other hand, someone carefully picking their way down and looking for a trail would have a fair chance of seeing it. Did she know the area well enough to expect a trail in that direction? <shrug>

[AW~]

Also, it's possible she could have got onto the Mt. Waterman Trail and later accidentally got off the trail again.

Which official trail is that? There is 10w04 Waterman #1 and 10w05 Waterman#2.
Yes, im getting at people dont know squat. They know how to put buttons and create an alltrails acct and act like they did a first ascent.
Its another abomination use trail caused by people "love".

MtWaterman is #2. When you ask practically anyone thats MtWaterman. So when Eugene Jo was lost, thats where the search commenced.
And the result was hes not here on #2 trail PERIOD.
Then it was like hes on #1. It was a meetup style group he was on,so yeah. If you expect people to know what trail they are on, good luck.

Now if you look up these trails on google, thats what it says. But once you go to the other secret decoder websites you get these routes. Maybe someone named it 'Brindle' after their dog that they run with, to hurry up and setup the route.

[Ry_Ky]

Do you think she would have recognized it as a trail if/when she came to it?

I suppose it all depends on her state of mind...

Thanks. That makes sense. If you know there's a trail downhill of the one you were initially hiking on and close by, you'd expect it and probably be able to find it. Even if you didn't know and you managed to stay calm and observant, you might be able to see it. But if you're panicking or rushing, I think it would be easy to miss because it's a narrow trail downhill of you.

A story from one of my SAR instructors sticks with me. He realized he had gotten off trail in the wilderness in Hawaii and felt himself panicking. So he sat down and focused on his breathing and didn't move again until his heart rate had stabilized. Then he was able to think straight and find his way again. We make more missteps when we're not in the right mindset.

I finished watching your Part 2 video last night and it was very illuminating. It's interesting to see that if she had walked through the easier terrain Westward through a few different paths, Hiker A would have still been able to see her at the location where he allegedly was waiting. Was he looking in that direction? He may have been focusing on the trail. But I actually bring that up to say I was surprised that the beanie was found in a place that appears so impassable. Certainly not along the path of least resistance. It's weird to me that she would have traveled that way if the beanie did indeed fall out of her pack there. Because it seems from your video that someone would have had to be putting themselves in somewhat challenging terrain to drop the beanie there? Perhaps she thought it was the shortcut Hiker A had mentioned earlier. It also makes sense that she'd be rushing if she did think this was the shortcut and that Hiker A was significantly ahead of her.

[Ry_Ky]

Also, it's possible she could have got onto the Mt. Waterman Trail and later accidentally got off the trail again.

Which official trail is that?

Oop, sorry, doing some research because I'm not a local. On my Caltopo map it just says "Mount Waterman Trail." But I looked up 10x04 Waterman #1 and 10w05 Waterman #2. I was talking about 10W04 Mt. Waterman Trail #1, the one from Three Points Trailhead toward Twin Peaks Saddle. The one directly south and downhill of where Monica and Hiker A were hiking (10w05 Waterman#2?) I can see how this is confusing to hikers.

If #2 is just called Mt Waterman, then what is the #1 trail called?

I agree, I'm concerned when people use AllTrails as their only resource. It can give new hikers a false sense of confidence.

[David R]

But I actually bring that up to say I was surprised that the beanie was found in a place that appears so impassable...

This is why I find any armchair analysis ridiculous. You are a SAR member yet based on what you read and watched you're confused as far as to why the beanie was found in that drainage. If you hiked the area especially before the search, it makes complete sense that she would have ended over there. The trail they used was infrequently hiked and at the point where she got off trail was a spot where you had to make a sharp turn like a switchback to start down the ridge. Now they have put wood in the area to designate the turn, before there was nothing. At that point you were on a wide saddle, with some rocks ahead of you. If you wanted to drop off going in a similar direction, you would end up right in the drainage where the beanie was found albeit on the wrong side of the mountain. This is just one small example of where all this discussion is based on poor understanding. Also contrary to what is being stated, Waterman is also one of the most gentle mountains in the area with some of the least amount of brush for our area. I have hiked it from just about any direction taking any ridge I like because of that.

[AW~]

Oop, sorry, doing some research because I'm not a local....

Checking caltopo shared maps There is Waterman to Baden-Powell, Dust to Crust #F7VMG997.

Untitled.jpg

#1 trail...idk. Its actuallly notMtWaterman...because it takes away from #2s navigation, which is designed for that type of hiker. "Three Points" is one Ive heard a lot. But its been called South Waterman and my personal name as west waterman. West waterman is zoned that way, with more due diligence required and less travellers.

Yeah, we are beyond that point, and increasingly SAR says bring a phone or communication device. But it doesnt change the terrain, its going to be X-C protocol no matter what alltrails says.

[HikeUp]

Here's the sign at Three Points (circa 2011)...

IMG_9003.jpg

I see some are speculating she knew about 10W04 to the south and turned left to go there. In the same breath you're arguing she turned left by accident. I speculate she didn't know shit about navigation. All of this speculation (including mine) is useless and equally improbable/probable. Just shut up already.

[Ry_Ky]

You are a SAR member yet based on what you read and watched you're confused as far as to why the beanie was found in that drainage. If you hiked the area especially before the search, it makes complete sense that she would have ended over there.

When I initially plotted the location of the beanie, it made a lot of sense to me because it's a direct line downhill from where she likely exited the trail, at that point where the trail makes a sharp right turn, before it was marked with wood. It still makes sense. I'm just saying I am curious about that path after watching SideQuestHiker's video because it seemed like there was more open and passable terrain west of her at that point. But if she's just crashing downhill in a straight line and not looking around much for a gentler path, or she started off along the ridge and went down the drainage anyway, both of those explain the beanie being there. I just wanted to hear from someone who has hiked off trail around the beanie location, because it seems like from SideQuestHiker's video that that drainage is more challenging terrain than the paths he was taking in his shirt visibility test. (Or would those paths he took lead to the beanie location anyway?) Ultimately, it doesn't matter because the beanie was found in that drainage, indicating that she was almost certainly descending through the drainage.

[Edward]

I don't have a problem with people speculating. We have a wide menu of alternative explanations. If you examine any one of them, the known facts neither make it likely nor rule it out. I do have a problem with disparaging other people and their thoughts. Argue with them if you disagree, but don't knock them.

As a side comment, I have not hiked this area since the 1970's. I certainly did not think of it as an area where it is easy to become lost, due to the east-west orientation of the ridge, with ACH to the north, and the relatively open rounded terrain. (In agreement with David R's comments on the area.) No GPS then, and I can't remember ever looking at a map or checking direction on a compass. Including two winter trips with thick snow cover. Never gave a thought to the trails having names. The only navigational materials then were John Robinson's book, the USGS topos, and an Angeles National Forest map. And I am not the greatest navigator in the field. I have become 'lost' often enough, but I distinguish between being 'locally lost', which costs you time and energy to make corrections, and 'globally lost'. I am not disparaging the people who think that Monica became completely confused and disoriented, and that accounts for her disappearance. That is certainly a possible explanation. But not certain enough to disparage other explanations.

[HikeUp]

My point is that speculation is useless. Not that it is wrong or right or well intended. Doesn't do anyone any good.

[SideQuestHiker]

What follows are some SideQuestHiker ramblings. Find them amusing, find them annoying. I don't mind either way.

Does it mean anything that the beanie wasn't found until the next day? Perhaps the 'first day' searchers didn't consider the direction towards the beanie a likely path and didn't go down that way until they searched other directions first.

I imagine if I were someone who was unfamiliar with that trail and suddenly found myself in the area beyond the corner, my first thought would be to do my best to continue going along the ridgeline until I saw something familiar. It wouldn't be to bushwhack down an unfamiliar slope into the unknown. But that's just me.

But SideQuest, what about the beanie? If she didn't go that way, how did it get there? The least controversial answer is that Monica dropped it going further west along the ridge and an animal picked it up and carried it to where it was found. But that would imply the animal moved the beanie soon after she dropped it going west on the ridge, otherwise the searchers would have found it on day one. Does it imply that? Not necessarily, maybe the searchers just suck. Or maybe Monica went some distance down the west ridge, then went off-trail, and only then lost the beanie, and then an animal carried it to where it was found. But doesn't it seem that the further away Monica got before dropping the beanie, the less likely it would be found where it was? The animal could have dropped it anywhere. What are the odds it would have been dropped in a spot where a lost hiker could have wandered through? Ok, ok, I give up. The odds are very low that Monica dropped the beanie after going far down the west ridge. It's more likely she either went down the south slope in the direction of where the beanie was found, or she dropped the beanie shortly after missing the corner, perhaps while exploring the area beyond the corner in order to decide which way to continue. She would have needed to drop it in a spot the searchers would have easily missed it, and then we still need an animal to carry it down to where it was found. The 'animal carried it' theory seems less and less likely that more I think about it.

What is a more controversial answer for how the beanie got to where it was found? The first thing that comes to mind is that it was planted there by Hiker A, but that implies a whole lot of other stuff about Hiker A and I don't feel like going there. It being planted by someone else gets into 'tin foil hat' territory and I want to go there even less.

A final option for the beanie is that it's not Monica's beanie. It's just a red beanie similar to the one Monica was wearing. But the odds seem low that a red beanie similar to the one Monica was wearing was found on a mountain slope in the area where she went missing. Not impossible, but highly unlikely, in my mind.

So, anyways, it seems like the searcher didn't think going south was an obvious choice to search the first day, but the beanie strongly indicates Monica did go that way. Perhaps, as others have mentioned, Monica thought she was taking the "shortcut". That could explain going off trail at all. But according to the recent LA Magazine article, Monica's family says she's not a risk taker. So why would she descend down an unfamiliar slope into the unknown? Maybe Monica's family didn't know her as well as they thought they did. Or maybe Monica was already in panic mode when she decided to go down the south slope. I still find it hard to image it being a natural and obvious way to go, given they just spent the last 45 minutes coming down a ridge. But like I said before, that's just my opinion. And I don't know what a panicky, lost hiker would choose to do.

So let's say she did go down the south slope. For her to end up crying out in anguish near Twin Peaks Saddle she would have had to make a few more mistakes (beyond going down the south slope). Mistake 1 would be turning left when she reached the Three Points-Mt Waterman trail. Mistake 2 would be to not notice she was heading back up hill. Mistake 3 would be to miss the trail sign at the junction with the Twin Peak Saddle trail, and go towards the saddle instead of Mt Waterman. Mistake 4 would be to go off-trail after reaching Twin Peaks Saddle and going down into Devils Canyon. How plausible is it that she made that sequence of mistakes? Each individual mistake is plausible, but all of them together? <shrug> I have no idea how to judge the mind of a lost person in distress.

Anyway, enough rambling for one post.

[Sean]

How plausible is it that she made that sequence of mistakes? Each individual mistake is plausible, but all of them together? <shrug> I have no idea how to judge the mind of a lost person in distress.

As someone who has been lost and in distress in the high country of the San Gabriels, I think it's very plausible that Monica made a series of mistakes leading to her doom. I previously outlined them, and I did so assuming that she wasn't in distress but simply got turned around somehow and attempted to self-rescue. This happens to intelligent people who think they know enough to get themselves out of a jam, yet unknowingly have already made a fatal error. Then they get themselves dehydrated and/or panicked, and go down the dark corridor of more bad choices. We're talking about a woman who hadn't learned to put her beanie inside her backpack. We've all made these rookie mistakes. I used to leave my sunglasses on summits a lot, until I learned not to set them down while taking a selfie. The glasses go on your face or in the backpack. The end. I used to clip my gloves to the outside of my pack, until I lost one in the freezing wind on Baldy. The gloves go on your hands or in the pack. And make sure your pack don't have no holes in it! I've been there too. My point is that you might be a rocket scientist, but what good is that if you still lose your beanie in the wilderness? One or two brain farts might result in the loss of your life. That's why it's so important to have a good hiking partner and to share responsibility for each other. It's easy to assume that your follower has learned the critical turns on a route, but it only takes one wrong assumption in the wilderness...

[coloradohiker]

So let's say she did go down the south slope. For her to end up crying out in anguish near Twin Peaks Saddle she would have had to make a few more mistakes (beyond going down the south slope).

How often have you been what you thought was 100 miles from nowhere when you hear a car on a road a couple of miles away? What about an echo in the mountains that seemed to travel from miles away? There's been discussion about how sound doesn't travel well around boulders and other obstacles, but in certain conditions sounds can travel great distances. Have you ever picked up a conversation between people who were on the other side of a lake? We don't have the full story of what the 2 hikers told the searchers. Were they in the Twin Peaks Saddle or was the sound coming from there? Probably this is not such a great clue. It doesn't narrow the search area that much.

[cougarmagic]

Here are my thoughts on this, in no particular order.

I was contacted during the first week of the search for input on the possibility of a wild animal attack, due to my experience with mountain lions in particular. I don't wish to appear as 'bragging' but I do consider myself an expert on mountain lion behavior, particularly in the mountains around Los Angeles, having studied, tracked and photographed them for 15 years for conservation organizations (and just a very focused personal interest).

So all the rest is my own opinion but the information on mountain lions I characterize confidently as facts.

Mountain lion attacks on humans are exceedingly rare. They avoid human activity as a general rule. Mule deer is their primary prey and they are specially adapted to ambush and grab them by their long neck, either severing the spine or crushing the windpipe. Occasionally some will bite the snout covering the nostrils and mouth and asphyxiate them that way. Their vision is most acute in twilight so hunting is done during dusk and dawn, and they sleep most of the day. Depth perception and focus is greatly reduced in full sunlight making it hard for them to take down prey.

For the following reasons, a mountain lion attack being the cause of Monica's disappearance is extremely improbable. She was in a popular hiking area on a weekend day past dawn with other hikers around. She is not a mule deer, has a tiny short neck and walks upright which mountain lions have no experience with. That increases the lion's risk of being injured or wasting energy on a failed attempt. There are plenty of mule deer available in that area so it doesn't fit with most lion/human attacks where the lion is starving, sick or injured in a way that makes it take unusual risks.

Lion kill sites (I've seen a bunch of them) are dramatically noticeable. There is blood, scuffing, bits of fur, and then a long drag mark. None of that was seen in any of the searching. No torn fabric, no backpack laying on the ground, etc.

The only thing a mountain lion could have to do with this situation is that one could be responsible for the 'screams' heard from other hikers at Twin Peaks Saddle. Female lions in estrus caterwaul and the sound is often described as a woman screaming. Those hikers said that it didn't continue for more than 'a minute' though. Caterwauling should go on and on. It stands out to me that those hikers were so alarmed by the sound that they reported it to the first authorities they could find, which just happened to be SAR/Sheriff personnel gathering to search for Monica back on ACH. It's a shame no one got any contact information from them so that we could have gotten more detail. I am suspicious that scream or screams were human and not mountain lion.

Now that you've suffered through my mountain lion info-dump, here is my opinion on the rest of it.

When I asked hiker A about Monica's experience and sense of direction, Monica was described as being comfortable on trail but not off trail, that she had never been on Mt. Waterman or that particular route before, and that in general she could tend to not pay attention to the larger overall picture of a hike. For example I asked if she would know that ACH was to the north/on her right, and if she had a sense of which direction was north. The response to that question was that no, she very well might not. At one point they stopped to look at the observatory on Mt. Wilson. If she knew Mt Wilson was to the west of Mt Waterman, that might help but we have no way of knowing that she did.

So yeah, given that there was some vague talk about taking a shortcut and the fact that she could no longer see hiker A to follow, I can absolutely understand a situation where she starts heading downhill in the wrong direction and continues for a while longer than one would expect, before realizing something was wrong. It doesn't look to her like she's on a trail anymore but she doesn't know what the shortcut looks like. To me, the beanie (which is seen in photos tucked into the hip belt of her pack) gets dropped when she stops to get her bearings, takes off her pack to get water, try to see if her phone works, etc and doesn't notice that the beanie gets left behind.

I also asked if Monica had an idea of what to do when lost. As mentioned here, these meetup groups should go over any plans for in case a person gets separated, but they often don't. I asked if she would stay put and wait for rescue or keep moving. I was told they thought she would try to solve her own problem and would keep moving.

Then, as also mentioned here, it becomes a matter of how panicked she becomes and how far she is able to travel in any given direction. People start to make really unpredictable decisions at that point, as things get worse and time passes.

SAR focused on the northern slope on day one. She could have gone quite a distance downhill toward Devil's canyon if she thought that 'at least the car is downhill, I know that much', on that first day and people would not be able to see or hear her. Potential for falling on a steep bouldery section is high.

It's really sad. People definitely go missing and are never found, or are found many years later, by chance.

As a rule I would dismiss anything written by random people on reddit who have no connection to anything. Almost all the questions posed in that thread have normal, reasonable answers. (Unless you willingly choose to ignore those answers.) I hope to never see anything from that thread again. It makes me wonder how those people are able to tie their own shoes.

[SideQuestHiker]

I think it's very plausible that Monica made a series of mistakes leading to her doom...

Very good points! Especially that 'beanie not in pack' indicates she is still making rookie mistakes.

[SideQuestHiker]

Were they in the Twin Peaks Saddle or was the sound coming from there?

Yeah, I wondered that too. Are the 'estimated GPS coordinates' that were given THEIR location when they heard the sound, or their best guess at where the sound was coming FROM?

Probably this is not such a great clue. It doesn't narrow the search area that much.

I agree. I still plan to go up to the Twin Peak Saddle area in a couple of weeks (weather permitting) and do some looking around. I can see from the map of volunteer search paths that some searching did take place in that area back in the day, so I don't expect to find anything. But you never know.

[SideQuestHiker]

What are the odds it (the beanie) would have been dropped in a spot where a lost hiker could have wandered through?

It's probably bad form to quote yourself in a reply, but I had more thoughts on this specific question. I realized later that there is a built in assumption in the above question. The assumption is that there are very few spots (1 or 2) up in that area that qualify as "a spot where a lost hiker would wander through", and therefore it's very unlikely an animal would have randomly dropped the beanie in one of those few spots. This assumption leads to the conclusion that the beanie's location most likely indicates the path Monica took.

But I think this is a bad assumption. There are many spots beyond the corner where a lost hiker could wander through. Of course the primary ones are down the south slope, down the north slope, further down the ridgeline, and back the way she came. But within each of those categories there are many paths a person could take. Given that, it increases the probability an animal could pick up a beanie and randomly drop it in a spot where a lost hiker could wander through. In other words, I don't think the location where the beanie was found necessarily rules out the 'animal carried it there' possibility.

That said, a stronger argument against the 'animal carried it there' possibility is the fact the beanie wasn't found the first day. If Monica dropped the beanie in a spot where the searchers WOULD have found it on day one, then an animal would need to have picked it up and moved it before searchers got there. On the other hand, if an animal didn't pick it up until much later, that implies Monica dropped the beanie in a spot overlooked in the day-one search. Which of these two options is more likely? My guts says option 2, but I don't know if that helps figure anything out.

Why am I even going down this train of thought? I am trying see if it's possible to build a case for Monica continuing westward down the ridge rather than immediately heading down the south slope. I like the westward option because, having just been up there, I know that if you just walk to the west end of the saddle that's beyond the corner you can see the road (see the Part 2 video starting at timecode around 29:12 to see the saddle, and timecode 36:37 to see the west end of the saddle and then the view of the road). My thinking is that Monica got down into that saddle area and then looked around for a good way to continue. Had she just gotten to the west end of the saddle she would have seen the road. That then may have convinced her to continue further west down the ridgeline, looking for a safe way to get down to the road. However, for this idea to work I need to explain how the beanie got to where it was found. Thus I am grasping at various straws to see if any of them can save this idea.

[coloradohiker]

That said, a stronger argument against the 'animal carried it there' possibility is the fact the beanie wasn't found the first day.

cougarmagic stated "SAR focused on the northern slope on day one."

[Edward]

Our discussions tend to focus on what Monica did, after she made an error, and recognized she was lost. But to complete the story, we need an explanation for how she died, and why she was not found. And that is the part that is the greater puzzle to me. It is easy to imagine a hiker having an accident that immobilizes them: twisted ankle or knee, fractured leg bone. Particularly a solo hiker, lost and off-trail, without hiking poles. It is much more difficult to imagine an accident in that area that leaves them dead or permanently unconscious, with their body hidden from searchers. And without such an accident, it takes considerable time to die, unless there is extreme heat or cold, which was not the case. (Monica is even reported to have had about three quarts of water. Which puzzles me. Why would anyone carry three quarts of water on that hike? My default for the Skyline Trail in Palm Springs was four. And wouldn't she have drunk most of it by the time she was last seen?)

Personally, I am content with the view that she missed the turn, and shortly after was where the beanie cap was found. By that time, she would recognize that she was lost. If she took her pack off, the cap would have slipped to the ground, and her mind would have been on the more important issue of what to do.

I am not a big fan of the view that Monica was so confused and disoriented that she overshot the Three Points trail and continued south into Devil's Canyon, or even turned left and headed back towards Waterman and Twin Peaks. But those are certainly possibilities, and may be ultimately confirmed by finding her remains in one of those areas. Another is that she headed west, flagged down a ride on the ACH, and the driver turned out to be a predatory sociopath. I don't attach a very high probability to this scenario, because I don't think of the ACH as a highway predatory sociopaths cruise looking for victims. But every scenario that has been advanced has some issues.