.
Feedback

Shannan Gilbert's Cause of Death Undetermined

The Suffolk County Medical Examiner tells Gilbert's family that the results of the autopsy were inconclusive.

Yesterday, on the two-year anniversary of Shannan Gilbert's disappearance in Oak Beach, the Suffolk County Medical Examiner met with her family to report on the autopsy findings. The results were deemed "inconclusive," and the investigation into her death is still ongoing.

The search for New Jersey escort Gilbert, who disappeared in May 1, 2010, after meeting a client for sex on Oak Beach, led police to the discoveries of 10 sets of human remains, many believed to be the victims of a Long Island serial killer. Gilbert's body was found in a marshy area near Oak Beach last December.

Gilber's mother, Mari Gilbert, told NBC 4 New York, that she was disappointed by the meeting with the examiner: "I was hoping for something more substantial."

According to the family's lawyer, John Ray, two bones were missing from the skeleton's neck, and they believe the 911 call Gilbert made that night was evidence that she was being pursued, and not a victim of an accidental drowning, as Suffolk County Police have suggested. Five of the bodies found on the barrier beach island have been identified as sex workers.

There are no suspects in the case, nor in the Gilgo Beach murder investigation.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Babylon Village Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Adam Crowley May 15, 2013 at 06:53 pm
As I explained, my post was made on behalf of another village resident. However, I did take theRead More time to read the statute and do have an independent viewpoint on this subject. While I do not feel that all dogs require a muzzle at all times, if you have a dog that you know to be a threat to other dogs or humans, you would have a duty to take measures to eliminate that threat before bring that dog into public. If that measure is a muzzle, then that's what must be done. As my post indicated, I believe strict enforcement would be exceedingly difficult and, perhaps, unnecessary (at least with respect to the muzzle requirement). However, a total lack of enforcement is dangerous and unacceptable. I think a little common sense goes a long way and I have confidence that those charged with enforcing the Village code could do so selectively. I understand that selective enforcement may be a concept that many feel uncomfortable with. However, just because the law requires a muzzle, that is hardly a reason to disregard it in its entirety and allow dogs with vicious propensities to roam around unleashed. I will leave it up to Village lawmakers to remove the muzzle requirement (and suggest that they do so) if that is what it would take to make people comfortable with the leash requirement.
Concerned Citizen May 15, 2013 at 05:37 pm
Did you read the law? unless it be properly muzzled and effectively restrained by a chain or leashRead More I'll bet neither dog was muzzled Do you really want them to enforce this law