Missing on 9/11 iHeart True Crime

Open and shut. Her brother did it as revenge for her having an affair with his partner used 9/11 as and opportunity for the perfect coverup. Holes in his story. She was even at his place the night she went missing. Had 9/11 not have happened he would be in prison today. I believe he manipulated his family into thinking she died with honour by running into a building burning to save people. The perfect cover up. Ps. The NYPD did a poor job of investigating this.

Was excited to find this podcast. Unfortunately once you take out the ads and the information the presenter doesn’t know and all the people who ignored or refused interview requests, it’s not very captivating

If this story is considered through an “honour killing” lens things begin to line up. On this view the disappearance of Sneha planned for September 10 was covered conveniently by 9/11. The motive for the honour killing was set following the charges against Sneha which would bring dishonour to the family. However the fact that Sneha was married (a marriage that was not planned by her parents according to tradition) required that the family create a strong perception of disbelief in Sneha’s death that would relate to Ron and not permit of any thought of foul play perpetrated by the family. And so the family pursued the coverup via lawyers and pressing for investigation by the NYPD. The eldest brother posts flyers, probably planned prior to the 9/11 tragedy. The woman that was with Sneha at Century 21 probably avoided the cameras. She probably surveilled the location ahead of the shopping trip. She was the decoy who would have accompanied Sneha into a vehicle and the abduction and plan to end her life. It was raining but Sneha stayed dry because the plan was set. In honour killings the father and son (Sneha’s brothers) agree and align. If you look at honour killing cases a brother often endorses the decision with the father that the woman/girl has committed blasphemy and he may carry out the killing with cohorts. The behaviour of John is indicative. He accuses Sneha of significant sexual impropriety. He appears to envy her abilities. He is hostile and Ron asks him to desist and he does once he knows Sneha is dead. He even becomes close to Ron. John is strong and suspiciously overboard with the superlatives during the interview with Jon. The unexplained emails were possibly written by the brothers who entered Sneha’s email after she was dead. The mother may have accepted the decision based on tradition. The absence of the father considered against the theory implicates him. One very disquieting aspect is Sneha’s inappropriate behaviour, her promiscuity, an indication of extreme sexual abuse. Essentially she projected what she could not identify to her brother/s father? onto the two people she worked with and recanted in some recognition of its actual derivation. The abuse she endured must have been excessive and long rooted but she was forced to sublimate it and perhaps repressed some or most memory. In these stories mothers often know or guess but deny to survive. It is sad that abuse in this scenario landed her into charges. The silence from John regarding the 10th is indicative and suspicious. There are extremely brutal honour killing cases in the UK. In one case a girl was strangled then buried in a backyard in a suitcase.