Cari Farver vanished in 2012, yet messages from her accounts continued for years. The truth was a calculated murder and digital impersonation campaign in which Liz Golyar framed the missing woman as a stalker while hiding what she had done.
When David Kroupa entered online dating in Omaha, he was clear that he was not looking for a committed relationship. He met Liz Golyar and later Cari Farver, two women who crossed paths only briefly at his apartment. What followed looked like an escalating love triangle, but almost everything David believed about it had been manufactured.
Cari disappeared on 13 November 2012. Rather than helping people recognise that she was missing, thousands of messages made it appear that she had chosen to abandon her son, job and home so she could torment David and Liz. The deception worked because a digital presence was mistaken for proof of life.
What Happened to Cari Farver?
David first met Liz through a dating site. Months later he met Cari, a computer specialist who was temporarily living near Omaha for work. Cari had a teenage son in Iowa and maintained regular contact with her family. She and David began a casual relationship, and she stayed at his flat on the night of 12 November 2012.
The following morning was the last time David saw Cari. Soon afterwards he received a message that appeared to ask whether she could move in. When he declined, the replies became angry. David assumed Cari had reacted badly to rejection, even though the tone was inconsistent with the woman he knew.
Cari’s mother also received messages claiming Cari had found another job and needed space. Her employer received a resignation. Yet nobody spoke to Cari by telephone or saw her in person. She stopped contacting her son, abandoned her belongings and never accessed her money in any normal way.
The supposed harassment intensified. David, Liz and David’s former partner Amy Flora received abusive or threatening messages from accounts using Cari’s identity. Cars and homes were vandalised. The attacks tended to draw David and Liz back together whenever their relationship weakened.
In August 2013 Liz’s rented home burned. Investigators found multiple points of origin and accelerants, establishing arson. Four pets died. Emails attributed to Cari claimed responsibility and wished death on Liz and her children. The apparent confession reinforced the story that Cari was alive and dangerously obsessed.
The impersonation continued across numerous email addresses, telephone numbers and social-media accounts. Liz also maintained a relationship with another man, Todd Butterbaugh, whose home internet connection would later become important. The volume of communication created the illusion of several participants while concealing one author.
Investigators initially struggled with fragmented reports and limited phone downloads. The case changed when detectives reopened Cari’s disappearance and digital-forensics specialist Anthony Kava analysed the data as a connected system. Messages allegedly sent by Cari traced back to networks and devices associated with Liz.
In December 2015 Liz was found with a gunshot wound to her thigh and accused Amy of shooting her. Amy was at home with her young child, and her cold car supported her account that she had not travelled. Police began to suspect Liz had shot herself and decided to let her believe they accepted her story.
Liz then supplied messages supposedly written by Amy. Those messages “confessed” to killing Cari and described a stabbing in Cari’s vehicle, wrapping the body in a tarp and disposing of it after burning. By trying to frame Amy, Liz revealed details that investigators believed only the killer would know.
Physical and digital evidence accumulated. A photograph on Liz’s phone showed Cari’s Ford Explorer before police recovered it. Liz’s fingerprint was found inside. When technicians later removed the seat cover, they discovered a large bloodstain in the foam; DNA testing identified the blood as Cari’s.
Searches also recovered property linked to Cari. Email-provider records connected Liz to the impersonation accounts even when she used services designed to disguise locations or delay messages. The Nebraska Supreme Court later noted that she did not contest the evidence showing she authored the “Farver” and “Flora” emails.
The most disturbing evidence came from a micro-SD card previously used in Liz’s phone and later found in an old tablet. Investigators recovered deleted photographs of a tarp and what appeared to be decomposing human tissue. Visible tattoos were consistent with Cari’s known yin-yang tattoo and the Chinese character for “mother” on her foot.
Cari’s body has never been recovered. That did not prevent prosecution. A murder can be proved through circumstantial evidence when the victim’s disappearance, blood, abandoned life and the offender’s concealment demonstrate death beyond reasonable doubt.
Liz waived a jury and faced a bench trial. In 2017 she was convicted of first-degree murder and second-degree arson. She received life imprisonment for the murder plus a consecutive term of 18 to 20 years for the fire. Nebraska’s highest court upheld the convictions, finding the evidence sufficient.
Why This Story Matters
This case matters because it shows how identity can be weaponised after death. Liz did not merely pretend Cari was alive; she constructed a hostile version of Cari that alienated the very people who might otherwise have searched for her. The victim was made to appear responsible for crimes committed against others.
It also demonstrates the limits of treating each message or incident separately. Harassment, vandalism, arson and disappearance looked like different problems until investigators connected their timing, devices and beneficiaries. Digital evidence gains meaning through patterns.
The investigation is a warning that online activity is not the same as personal contact. We can see how scheduled emails, spoofed numbers, multiple accounts and stolen credentials can simulate a person for years. Welfare checks must look beyond whether an account remains active.
Cari’s mental-health history was used early on to make her disappearance seem voluntary. That assumption delayed scrutiny and shows how readily a missing adult can be blamed for behaviour authored by somebody else. Her consistent relationships with her son, mother and employer offered stronger evidence about what was normal for her.
Finally, we should remember that the case belongs to Cari, not the “love triangle” that obscured her. She was a mother, daughter and skilled professional whose identity was stolen after her life was taken. The forensic achievement was not simply decoding thousands of messages; it was restoring the truth those messages were designed to erase.
Topics Include
How David Kroupa met Liz Golyar and Cari Farver
Cari’s disappearance and the messages sent in her name
Harassment, vandalism and the fatal 2013 house fire
IP addresses, impersonation accounts and digital forensics
Cari’s blood, vehicle evidence and deleted photographs
Golyar’s murder conviction and life sentence
Resources and Further Reading
“A Tangled Web: A Cyberstalker” - Leslie Rule
“Lover, Stalker, Killer” - Netflix film