Paul and Sarah Skiba

Paul and Sarah Skiba | Where Are the Bodies?

Intro

This post analyzes the 1999 disappearance of Paul Skiba, his 9-year-old daughter Sarah, and employee Lorenzo Chivers through structured forensic pattern recognition. Though blood, bullet holes, and a piece of human scalp were found in Paul’s truck, no arrests were made—and none of the bodies have ever been recovered.

This case outcome explores whether the patterns in behavior, scene staging, and motive suggest not a chaotic triple homicide, but a calculated act carried out by someone close. One rooted not in randomness, but in betrayal, emotional rupture, and control.

All findings are speculative and intended solely for educational and investigative discussion. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Case Overview

On February 7, 1999, Paul Skiba returned to his Westminster, Colorado, moving company lot after a day of work. With him were his daughter Sarah, visiting for the weekend, and Lorenzo Chivers, an employee and friend. All three vanished that evening.

Paul’s moving truck was later found parked precisely in the lot. Inside were bloodstains, bullet holes, and a piece of Sarah’s scalp. DNA confirmed that Paul and Sarah had been injured or killed. The truck was locked, missing its metal loading ramp, and there were no signs of forced entry.

Despite these clear indicators of foul play, no bodies were ever found—and no one has ever been charged.

Key Forensic Pattern Findings

1. The Scene Was Controlled, Not Chaotic

The truck wasn’t ditched—it was returned. Locked. Cleaned just enough. This was not a panicked escape, but a deliberate act of scene control by someone who knew the routine and understood the optics of the business. The killer used the expected return to cover a disappearance in plain sight.

The setup created confusion, which bought time—and time is what the killer needed.

2. The Bodies Were Removed Using Professional Knowledge

The missing loading ramp is no coincidence. It’s the most important clue in this case. It suggests that the killer used company tools to transport the bodies of Paul, Sarah, and Lorenzo to a second location.

This wasn’t impulsive—it was operational. Whoever did this had the knowledge, strength, and privacy to carry out a triple removal with chilling efficiency.

3. All Three Victims Were Targeted with Purpose

This wasn’t a robbery. It wasn’t random. Each victim tells a piece of the story.

• Paul was the central figure—business owner, leader, and possibly a target of resentment.

• Sarah was not collateral—she was silenced. Her presence deepened the emotional motive.

• Lorenzo may have witnessed something, or simply stood in the killer’s way. His inclusion was purposeful, not incidental.

The act was personal and strategic—and everyone who died was chosen.

4. The Crime Was Timed to Delay Discovery

The disappearance happened in the narrow window between returning to the lot and anyone expecting them home. The killer struck at a moment of isolation and routine, when no one would immediately notice they were gone. The scene was set to confuse, ensuring that even once discovered, the trail would already be cold.

5. The Public Narrative Was Fragmented for a Reason

The blood. The scalp. The locked truck. The missing ramp. It was just enough to prove a tragedy—but not enough to point to anyone specific. That wasn’t sloppiness. That was intentional.

The killer left pieces of the puzzle behind. But not the center.

Conclusion

Paul and Sarah Skiba—and Lorenzo Chivers—were not simply lost. They were removed. Carefully. Quietly. By someone who knew how to vanish people without a trace.

This was not a crime of passion—it was a planned and executed operation, likely rooted in betrayal, business entanglements, or personal rage. The bodies are not missing because they were lost. They’re missing because someone made sure they wouldn’t be found.

The case remains open. But the patterns speak loudly: they are still out there.

Disclaimer

This review is based on forensic pattern recognition and symbolic case analysis methodology. It is intended solely for educational and investigative discussion and does not constitute legal evidence. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.