MN MN - Joshua Guimond, 20, Collegeville, 9 Nov 2002 - #2

[Marzipan]

Thanks for posting back. I’ve got limited time to write this so I’ll try and answer the main points but forgive my brief reply.

1) I don’t believe the sighting was Josh, and even if it was, I don’t believe the person they saw fell into water. The water has to be 6-8ft fall from the bridge? if a human body weighing 170-200lb falls into water, you’d hear it. It would absolutely make a noise, even above two people talking. There would even possibly be a scream as you fell. To hear absolutely nothing really makes me think the water theory doesn’t make a tonne of sense. And again, the sighting was just someone who resembled Josh. It’s just not a reliable witness, and I don’t think it holds too much weight in my theories

2) I don’t think it’s a big jump at all - Josh could have very easily been spiked. In the 2000’s, spiking was a huge, huge deal - it was much more common than people thought. I actually rewatched the episode again and it confirmed some people saw Josh as the studious and serious type, so it wouldn’t be unthinkable for someone to spike his drink, thinking it’ll make for a more fun, less serious version of Josh to come out - without realising it would lead to a bad ending.

3) Abbey monks are abusers of younger kids. They just aren’t interested in anyone over 18, I’ve read almost every monks publicly available credible accusations and in most cases the victims are between 6-15. There’s no mention of anyone 20 or older being abused. Besides, why would the monks kill Josh who has literally no evidence on them. All he has done is search for statute of limitations conspiracy saint johns, which to me sounds like something you’d type if you’re at the very beginning of research, rather than at the end of a 500 page novel detailing historic abuse at the monastery. Add to the fact this so-called paper was never found. I can’t help but feel Nick mentioned it to divert attention.

4) I think that’s most likely, although I do doubt it would be intentionally. I don’t think there’s anyone I’ve heard about who would wish harm on Josh, but I do believe an accidental death is possible, and then covered up as mentioned in my theory.

Regarding narcotics - unless the police, or Josh’s family release more information on the specifics of that, we’ll never know, but the fact the police in the Netflix documentary mention that the kids had lives to protect, and during the meeting with Josh’s dad, when they got confronted about the narcotics business and they all shut up and said nothing, and seemed “subdued” - to me, that speaks volumes.

I have read all these threads about Josh but it’s been a while. I think I’ll go back to the beginning.
But two questions for you or anyone: Why do you think someone hiding something bigger than just trying to hide some bad college behavior would agree to be interviewed for a major Netflix show, such a close-up of every facial expression?
If a body was moved, where would you look for it?

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I have read all these threads about Josh but it’s been a while. I think I’ll go back to the beginning.
But two questions for you or anyone: Why do you think someone hiding something bigger than just trying to hide some bad college behavior would agree to be interviewed for a major Netflix show, such a close-up of every facial expression?
If a body was moved, where would you look for it?

I have thought the same - and my thoughts are:

1) money - I assume Netflix paid the guests for their time, and I’m sure they got a decent pay cheque
2) to divert attention. Nick is incredibly careful with words. Too careful. Every word is well thought out before he says it
3) Nick almost needs to do the interview - he was allegedly Josh’s best friend
4) It’s even more interesting to me that not a single person at the poker party appeared on the Netflix show. The more I think about it, that speaks volumes too. They’re the last people to see Josh - even if anyone didn’t follow my theory - and not a single one of them appeared on camera, and none of them have interviewed. That’s beyond suspicious. To me, that’s a sign of guilt.

I think it would have actually been forgiven if they just said 20 years ago that there was an accident. They probably didn’t think in 20 years people will still be investigating.

If I put myself in the mind of someone who knew Josh was deceased at the poker party and that they need to dispose of the body:

If a body was moved, you’d not want to travel far with it. You’d likely wrap it up, in some old bedsheets or bin bags and take it to the dumpster - it’s a dark night, hardly any lighting. The party is over. You don’t want to make a sound. The dumpsters get emptied regularly on campus. If we’re caught we’ll say we’ve got no idea how he got there, maybe he was on a bad trip and tried to sleep and OD’d in the dumpster? If he’s not found before the dumpster contents are incinerated, then we get away with it and we erase the computer, no one knows we sell drugs. We can’t travel far with a body. We can’t be seen driving Josh’s car, we can’t just run around campus with a body on our shoulder. It has to be somewhere close. Somewhere dark where no one will see us or suspect anything. No one will suspect us going to the dumpster. In fact, that looks extremely normal. Just a bunch of students keeping their dorm clean; it’s even more normal that after a dorm party there would be lots of waste going to the dumpster. No one will suspect a thing. No one is going to think a body is in the dumpster, just cans, beers, food. The dumpster can fit and hide a body. What if we put the body in and all the food and beers and bottles on top to hide it further? The dumpsters aren’t weighed before pickup, they’re just picked up and taken to the smokehouse to be incinerated. Perfect plan.

And that right there is why I think they would have used the dumpster.

 

[NeverPersonal]

Today marks 18 years since Joshua disappeared from the campus of St. John's University. He had such big plans for his future, and I have no doubt he would have achieved them all. His family was so proud of him. It is sad that his grandfather passed away before he was able to find the answers. The Guimond family was left shattered, never to be the same again. St. John's banned Josh's Dad from being on the campus. A thorough investigation of alibis for the monks was never done. And the abbot is not required to divulge any potentially incriminating or helpful information due to the special laws of the Catholic church, which apparently can supercede the laws the rest of us must follow. Just ask Patrick J. Wall.

BBM - Why did they ban his dad from campus again? For poking around?

Hello everyone. I'm a current student of CSBSJU. The Joshua Guimond case has always fascinated me and I intend to do some searching in the area sometime soon. The case could have easily been an accidental drowning or case of hypothermia. However, I'm quick to remember the stories about this place that gives me pause. Growing up around about 5 min from Saint Johns, the locals will tell you never to walk in the woods alone. There are countless stories about sexual assault, vicious attacks, and what can only be viewed as attempted assault involving the monks and staff members of the prep school that occur in those woods. You will never hear about any of this in the news as the Abbey has always been quick to cover it up. Currently, there are multiple monks in "hiding" or as the church would say "under supervision" that are accused of these vicious assaults. One of which is a Stearns county suspect of the murder of two girls in the seventies. Check out the website Behind the Pine Curtain if you're new to learning about the violent history of the school. One thing's for certain, they stopped talking about it and are certainly not interested in searching further.

This is so wild. Who in their right mind thought it was a good idea to keep these dangerous people on a college campus? The way some monsters hide behind religion will never not terrify me.

It's nice to see some new attention paid to Josh's case. Just curious -- if you could change how this investigation was handled, what would you have done differently? How well was it handled, in your opinion? Anyone know if the local community ever talk about Josh's disappearance or is what happened to him on the campus of St. John's University just a thing that happened long ago?

They should have immediately began a lengthy interview process with every single attendee of that party, as well as Josh's roommate, and anyone who would've had access to Josh's computer. I think a lot would be different if the police had put forward any effort TOWARD instead of AGAINST finding the truth about Josh's disappearance.

Growing up in the local community, about 5 min from St. John's, I heard absolutely nothing about this case until I discovered the information through the Behind the Pine Curtain website. When I discuss it with my classmates over the 3.5 years I've attended school here not a single person knew about it and they were all shocked to find out a student went missing from campus. What's the oddest thing to me is that the school doesn't talk about Joshua. No more marches or searches. Not even a statement after the recent 15th anniversary. or support for the family all these years later. The lack of transparency here is astounding. As for what could have been done better, I'm not a police officer nor do I have much life experience but I can say allowing the same people who handled the Jacob Wetterling case to handle this one is asking for screw-ups. As for the college, the monks' alibies should have been taken as well as transparent cooperation by the church to search all areas.

Yep... bad press for them, so they pretend it doesn't exist...

John Sanners reign destroyed this cases chances. Every monk on the campus should have been lined up and questioned. An outside search party with superior knowledge and technology should have been asked to help search the complex stumpf lake in the first week.

Agree.

MAR 16, 2021
Father Of Missing St. John’s Student Josh Guimond Files Lawsuit Against Stearns County In Search For Answers – WCCO | CBS Minnesota (cbslocal.com)
[...]

Attorney Mike Padden is representing Josh Guimond’s father, still fighting to find out what happened to his son. ...

“We’ve commenced a lawsuit against Stearns County to secure the investigative file from the Stearns County Sheriff’s Office,” Padden said.

[...]

Padden has taken that push to court, with the desire their own private investigator can see what’s documented from the early days of Guimond’s November 2002 disappearance.

Padden points to Jacob Wetterling’s kidnapping 13 years earlier, led by the same people, as the main reason the information should be released.

[...]

Stearns County has said the Guimond case remains active and in court filings contends releasing data would “jeopardize the integrity of the investigation and could impede potential prosecution of anyone who played a role.”

A judge will make the final decision on what to do in the coming months. A father hoping it means his theories will see some follow-up after holding onto them for so long.

[...]

Good! I am SO GLAD they are doing this. Reminds me of Jennifer Kesse and her parents, and how the police begrudgingly handed over the files - only after blocking out 90% of the words, so they were useless. I will never understand the weird attitude of some departments that act almost like a toxic romantic relationship - "If I can't have you, no one can!"

This is a "hail Mary" pass here -- but -- at one point a MySpace page was discovered that contained writings that had all the appearances of possibly being connected to Josh's disappearance. It's been a long time, but I think I may have passed this onto someone involved with investigating the case. I don't know who "discovered" these pages or how -- but somehow I was directed to them. Does this sound familiar to you, DarkJodo?

Where can I read more?

The delay in releasing these photos seems crazy? Wonder what the justification for such a delay could be - the photos were not recovered from computer initially, or revisit of evidence catalysed by Unsolved Mysteries episode or new podcast? I don't understand why these photos were not released previously.

I agree, and I think the photos may very well be a red herring and released to the public just to try and make it appear they're still investigating so maybe the judge won't make them give their likely-pathetic-and-full-of-holes case file over.

I live in Stevens County. If the information I read was accurate, two days after Joshua went missing, someone went into his dorm and erased hundreds of photos off of his computer. These new photos maybe just now came too light especially because his father in 2021 filed a lawsuit against Stearns county and their lack of action in solving the case. Now the investigations seems to be in full throttle. So maybe they just now found those pictures.

The other thing they found on Joshua‘s computer was information on how to make fake identity cards.

There were other attempted abductions.

Always late at night always when these young men were out walking and in two cases the victims were able to run away and seek help.

Joshua‘s father thinks his son was set up and that his son is still alive for some purpose.

The police didn’t talk to students until two weeks after Joshua disappeared. The father thinks he knows who is responsible but it cannot be proven yet. He went to the school himself to investigate until a restraining order was put on him.

There are three other people that have disappeared in that area that are still missing. The sheriffs email said they would put out more information this week.

Regarding wiping the PC, I read that it was his roommate, then I read it was his uncle. It'd be great to have clarity.

I feel so badly for his father. I don't think Josh is alive but I understand why his dad wants to believe it

I found an episode on A&E's. I Survived series that can probably compare to what happened to Josh. Guy thinks hes meeting a girl for a hookup but ends up being attacked by a guy in a hockey mask.

You seem pretty certain that some foul play happened to Josh - what makes you so sure? Just curious

 

[NeverPersonal]

Thanks, I totally understand. Like I say, the reason I'm feeling so very confident in my theory is because after reading everything there is on the monks - I just don't think it's the monks - they've not killed anyone (to my knowledge). I'm not defending them - they're filth and deserve prison for life (or worse) - but I don't think the monks are likely to kill a 20-21 year old man.

The orange pontiac - the reason I don't think this is a vehicle to kidnap people - the story that was given was that campus security approached it and then a student hopped out and ran off. That stinks (no pun intended) of a drug deal. Someone in need of campus security would have run over to campus security. I just struggle to believe a car that returns to known hookup spots (aka the kind of place you'd do drug deals) is a serial killer/kidnapper etc.

I believe the answer has been staring at us right under our noses.

It all adds up (in my view). My theory explains why Nick's time was off - because he was helping out the mess at the poker party. And it explains why Katie's time was different to Nicks.

If Nick and Katie were working together, then their alibi would be absolutely water-tight. And this is yet another huge point that I think we've all been missing. Katie's time difference is most likely the real time Nick left - and it's precisely the time Nick and the people at the party needed to dispose of Josh's body, make a pact and a plan - then keycard back into his dorm, and never utter the truth to anyone again. 1 hour 42 minute discrepancy. That's huge. Absolutely huge - and would tie in with the panic/trouble of having to dispose of a body which none of them have ever done before - so immediately, they think: dumpster.

And it just so happens, the contents of the dumpsters get incinerated on-site - and also just so happens that there was a rumour of the incinerator being used on an off day - so almost immediately after the body was placed in a dumpster, the remains (including all clothing) would be gone - which also explains why there was never any evidence of clothing, bones or any remains in the lakes - the body never went to the lake.

For me, the very biggest giveaway that something went terribly wrong in the poker party is Dana's statement about Josh NEVER leaving without saying bye. The fact that Josh got up and headed to the bathroom without saying bye leads me to believe he thought he was coming back - he had no clue he was going into cardiac arrest etc Katie says too that it wasn't the Josh she knows who would leave like that.

And then you've got to look at the sheer amount of effort Nick goes to. Let's break down what Nick says he did:

• Nick says he headed to Katie's at 7-8pm
• Nick says he left Katie's at 2:30am
• Nick says how he checked Josh's bedroom when he got back to the apartment
• Nick says he checked Josh's bedroom in the morning
• Nick says he spoken to Alex and Greg "because he [Josh] was with them last night"
• Nick says he spoken to Katie and asked "where is Josh?"
• Nick pointed towards the monks being responsible due to the paper Josh was allegedly writing
• Nick says lie detector test because he was scared of a false positive showing up and pivoting the investigation in the wrong direction
• Nick left a note in Josh's room saying "stop down if you get back" (very interesting phrasing, specifically the word "if" you get back

Nick is clearly distancing himself from the investigation. As the police mentioned in the episode: "these kids have futures to protect" - and my goodness, is Nick protecting his. I find the amount of effort and storytelling just simply abnormal. He pushes the direction of investigation away from him by mentioning other people / declining the polygraph - and the police seem to have just said: "Oh ok then buddy, it can't be you!". It's unbelievable how the police haven't really, really honed in on him and the poker party group. Have I missed anything that Nick said he did?

To me, this seems like an abnormal amount of alibi / story - trying to cover his every step. And it seems like an abnormal amount of pushing the investigation away from him. I believe he pushed the investigation away from him by:

• Refusing the polygraph
• Mentioning the monks
• Mentioning Josh was last with Alex/Greg
• Saying "he" [Nick] didn't touch the computer

When you re-watch the documentary, re-watch it with the following lens over your eyes:

1) The group has a narcotics business
2) Look at how many times Nick diverts attention from himself during the investigation
3) Look at how much thought/effort Nick is going to, to try and create an alibi for himself
4) Nick's facial expressions - I know some people think it's pseudo-science, but facial expressions can reveal a lot - I see remorse, guilt - I see a man who knows more than he's letting on - because I believe he knows what happened to Josh

At this point, I'm utterly convinced. I'm just going to wait for other people to review all of my theory and then I think we need to get the Stearn's County Sheriff Dept working on it.

I just simply don't believe Josh ever left that party. The fact the poker party group has never done public interviews, declined interviews, Alex deleted data etc None of the poker party appear to have gone to any major trouble hunting for Josh - to me, proves my theory has some weight.

Apologies for my long posts - but one more thing - Nick has been caught in 2-3 lies, I'm willing to bet the poker party group are lying too. Nick is lying to save his career. The poker party group are lying to save their careers. The answer lies within Nick/Poker party group. I guarantee it.

thanks for looking into this as deeply as you have. i have a few questions.
how long were josh & katie dating? how serious was it?
was he cheating on her with these online profiles?
someone wrote here that they thought he was posing as a woman online?
what was katie & nick's relationship like? nick & josh fought over katie?
i thought potentially, hypothetically, a fight between josh & nick could've gotten out of control and nick told adam and got help from him re: computer.

but OD is also plausible

 

[formerpolicestaff]

thanks for looking into this as deeply as you have. i have a few questions.
how long were josh & katie dating? how serious was it?
was he cheating on her with these online profiles?
someone wrote here that they thought he was posing as a woman online?
what was katie & nick's relationship like? nick & josh fought over katie?
i thought potentially, hypothetically, a fight between josh & nick could've gotten out of control and nick told adam and got help from him re: computer.

but OD is also plausible

There’s very little information out there regarding Nick and Katie’s relationship. Something I did notice in many of the photographs, was that Nick was around Katie and hugging Katie a lot - more so than even Josh did. It’s extremely odd from the outside looking in, especially when you consider Katie was Josh’s girlfriend.

Nick was with Josh before Josh went to the poker party - we know that for a fact. So despite the room mate commenting he’d overheard Josh and Nick had argue about Katie, when Josh left for the poker party, I don’t think Josh was on very bad terms with Nick.

I think the online dating is a red herring. I think at best it was trolling online, and at worst Josh being single and fooling around online. I don’t see much evidence that points to the yahoo personals being the reason for the disappearance.

The only thing I’ve yet to fully understand is the 20+ minute conversation Josh had on the phone before he closed and deleted all of his Yahoo accounts from the computer. I don’t place huge value into this, but it would be highly interesting to know. Unfortunately the police don’t even know who Josh was calling as it was from a pre-paid card. That’s the only other bit of information I’m interested in.

 

[NeverPersonal]

There’s very little information out there regarding Nick and Katie’s relationship. Something I did notice in many of the photographs, was that Nick was around Katie and hugging Katie a lot - more so than even Josh did. It’s extremely odd from the outside looking in, especially when you consider Katie was Josh’s girlfriend.

Nick was with Josh before Josh went to the poker party - we know that for a fact. So despite the room mate commenting he’d overheard Josh and Nick had argue about Katie, when Josh left for the poker party, I don’t think Josh was on very bad terms with Nick.

I think the online dating is a red herring. I think at best it was trolling online, and at worst Josh being single and fooling around online. I don’t see much evidence that points to the yahoo personals being the reason for the disappearance.

The only thing I’ve yet to fully understand is the 20+ minute conversation Josh had on the phone before he closed and deleted all of his Yahoo accounts from the computer. I don’t place huge value into this, but it would be highly interesting to know. Unfortunately the police don’t even know who Josh was calling as it was from a pre-paid card. That’s the only other bit of information I’m interested in.

He closed and deleted all of his Yahoo accounts right after having a 20+ min convo with an unknown person he called using a pre-paid card? How did I miss that?

Do we know what the argument regarding Katie involved?

I wouldn't say we know how bad or not-bad the argument was. We have no idea. Josh and him being around eachother doesn't necessarily say much one way or the other. At around the same age as Josh & friends, I had a horrible fight with my bff and we stayed around eachother but in relative silence for hours afterward.

Also:

FindJoshua.com - Message Board Archive

Did you know about the tunnels? Thought that was interesting.

Last thing:
I wouldn't discount the monk theory solely based on the general age preference of predators in that category. At least according to this article Misconduct, Deception and a Missing Student | BehindThePineCurtain.com, a few went after college students to some extent.

In approximately 2002, Wollmering bragged about taking a student to the monks’ cabin. Wollmering also said that the student had trouble holding his liquor. The incident was not reported by a University employee, for fear of retaliation.

Fr. Wollmering’s Misconduct | BehindThePineCurtain.com

Another child sexual abuse lawsuit targets St. John’s | BehindThePineCurtain.com

Between 1984-1986, through his “role of psychologist, counselor and/or spiritual advisor,” Wollmering and two other monks “deceived” [student] John Doe into “engaging in sexual contact with him under the guise of providing religious instruction and emotional counseling.”
-
I mean, this "problem" sounded ENDLESS. It was/is? very much "the culture" there which is just sickening.

 

[Marzipan]

I have thought the same - and my thoughts are:

1) money - I assume Netflix paid the guests for their time, and I’m sure they got a decent pay cheque
2) to divert attention. Nick is incredibly careful with words. Too careful. Every word is well thought out before he says it
3) Nick almost needs to do the interview - he was allegedly Josh’s best friend
4) It’s even more interesting to me that not a single person at the poker party appeared on the Netflix show. The more I think about it, that speaks volumes too. They’re the last people to see Josh - even if anyone didn’t follow my theory - and not a single one of them appeared on camera, and none of them have interviewed. That’s beyond suspicious. To me, that’s a sign of guilt.

I think it would have actually been forgiven if they just said 20 years ago that there was an accident. They probably didn’t think in 20 years people will still be investigating.

If I put myself in the mind of someone who knew Josh was deceased at the poker party and that they need to dispose of the body:

If a body was moved, you’d not want to travel far with it. You’d likely wrap it up, in some old bedsheets or bin bags and take it to the dumpster - it’s a dark night, hardly any lighting. The party is over. You don’t want to make a sound. The dumpsters get emptied regularly on campus. If we’re caught we’ll say we’ve got no idea how he got there, maybe he was on a bad trip and tried to sleep and OD’d in the dumpster? If he’s not found before the dumpster contents are incinerated, then we get away with it and we erase the computer, no one knows we sell drugs. We can’t travel far with a body. We can’t be seen driving Josh’s car, we can’t just run around campus with a body on our shoulder. It has to be somewhere close. Somewhere dark where no one will see us or suspect anything. No one will suspect us going to the dumpster. In fact, that looks extremely normal. Just a bunch of students keeping their dorm clean; it’s even more normal that after a dorm party there would be lots of waste going to the dumpster. No one will suspect a thing. No one is going to think a body is in the dumpster, just cans, beers, food. The dumpster can fit and hide a body. What if we put the body in and all the food and beers and bottles on top to hide it further? The dumpsters aren’t weighed before pickup, they’re just picked up and taken to the smokehouse to be incinerated. Perfect plan.

And that right there is why I think they would have used the dumpster.

Sorry, now I remember that you did say all of that about the dumpster before. So much to keep track of. The extra detail to your thoughts on it helps though. Also your thoughts about the interviews. True, Katie is natural in speaking and so is everyone else except for Nick. But that doesn’t make him guilty. He didn’t do great on camera for one reason or another.
We cannot be sure the producers wanted to interview more people. It was a full lineup with all the interviews they had, but I too would have liked to have heard from them.
Thank you!

 

[formerpolicestaff]

He closed and deleted all of his Yahoo accounts right after having a 20+ min convo with an unknown person he called using a pre-paid card? How did I miss that?

Do we know what the argument regarding Katie involved?

I wouldn't say we know how bad or not-bad the argument was. We have no idea. Josh and him being around eachother doesn't necessarily say much one way or the other. At around the same age as Josh & friends, I had a horrible fight with my bff and we stayed around eachother but in relative silence for hours afterward.

Also:

FindJoshua.com - Message Board Archive

Did you know about the tunnels? Thought that was interesting.

Last thing:
I wouldn't discount the monk theory solely based on the general age preference of predators in that category. At least according to this article Misconduct, Deception and a Missing Student | BehindThePineCurtain.com, a few went after college students to some extent.

In approximately 2002, Wollmering bragged about taking a student to the monks’ cabin. Wollmering also said that the student had trouble holding his liquor. The incident was not reported by a University employee, for fear of retaliation.

Fr. Wollmering’s Misconduct | BehindThePineCurtain.com

Another child sexual abuse lawsuit targets St. John’s | BehindThePineCurtain.com

Between 1984-1986, through his “role of psychologist, counselor and/or spiritual advisor,” Wollmering and two other monks “deceived” [student] John Doe into “engaging in sexual contact with him under the guise of providing religious instruction and emotional counseling.”
-
I mean, this "problem" sounded ENDLESS. It was/is? very much "the culture" there which is just sickening.

Yes I’m aware of the tunnels and I spent hours and hours and hours trying to get an underground map of the tunnels. Unfortunately I couldn’t get one. Someone at the beginning of this thread said that they (st johns) did used to have the network of tunnels on their website but have taken it down. If anyone has a copy, I’d be extremely interested to see it.

I’ve explored the monk theory so many times and it just doesn’t make any sense to me. The monks are already in the news because of the abuse scandal. Wollmering has already abused countless kids all over the place. What is he going to achieve by kidnapping Josh and killing him on campus? And again, Josh’s age is/was relevant, a paedophile is primary focused on young people. Josh is too old for them. I think the abusers are a network of sick people who need hanging or a lethal injection - but I cannot see any reason why Josh would be murdered by them. They don’t kill their victims. They groom them - I have first hand experience of investigating computers and other digital devices of people like that - there’s many that are capable of murder but most groom until they get to the point where they can commit their abuse and not worry about the victim telling anyone.

At this point, I need a map of the underground tunnels, but I still think my OD theory is holding up. As I say, I explored the monks in major detail - I read all of their released files and theorised that they murdered Josh but that theory kept failing when I tried to find a motive.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Sorry, now I remember that you did say all of that about the dumpster before. So much to keep track of. The extra detail to your thoughts on it helps though. Also your thoughts about the interviews. True, Katie is natural in speaking and so is everyone else except for Nick. But that doesn’t make him guilty. He didn’t do great on camera for one reason or another.
We cannot be sure the producers wanted to interview more people. It was a full lineup with all the interviews they had, but I too would have liked to have heard from them.
Thank you!

True that doesn’t make him guilty, but it’s incredibly suspicious. Two cases immediately spring to mind where the killer was interviewed and they had strange interviews too.

1) Ian Huntley - murdered two young girls in Manchester, UK. He had very odd interviews, in fact, in one of them, he had an interview in his kitchen and one of the victims mobile phones was on the kitchen counter. He kept trying to move in front of it on camera and fidgeting a lot
2) the guy in the US who was being interviewed as they found the victims body parts nearby - he asked to go and sit down (I’d have to search his name)

I think a strange interview is highly significant. And the fact that Nick’s interview was extremely bizarre tells me that there’s something that Nick knows that he isn’t telling. Agreeing to do a polygraph then going back on it, is odd to me. Your best friend is missing and you’re worried about it being a false positive. Then he claims HE didn’t touch the computer - I think he didn’t do the polygraph because he didn’t want questions such as: “do you know who wiped the computer?”

 

[Bit of hope]

Thanks Marzipan. I've spent probably over 200 hours researching it at this point and probably 36 hours awake working on the final touches. I've sent the theory over to Josh's parents, and offered my services free of charge (digital forensics), if they did require someone to perform a completely independent, high quality forensic investigation of Josh's hard drive, and I've let them know I'd keep the results strictly private between just them and I, unless I got express consent and permission to post anything online e.g updated theories based on the analysis.

I agree on the snapping turtle theory - however, I just fail to see how trident wouldn't find a shoe - a part of a shoe - material from clothing etc. For them to find absolutely nothing leads me to believe he probably wasn't in the water - of course, I am keeping an open mind and not ruling it out. Perhaps the water should be searched again, because it's a huge area, but it seems a little bit unlikely I feel.

In the USA, in 2012, 3493 males between ages 15-24 were recorded to have died following an opioid overdose (Source: https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/home-and-community/safety-topics/drugoverdoses/data-details/)

Now, if you throw alcohol in the mix: Prescription opiates (e.g., Vicodin, OxyContin, Tylenol 3 with codeine, Percocet) combined with alcohol can result in slowed or arrested breathing, lowered pulse and blood pressure, unconsciousness, coma, and potential death. Source: (The Effects of Combining Alcohol with Other Drugs | University Health Services)

So I'd say yes it definitely happens. An overdose of an opioid plus alcohol seems like a death sentence. It's sad to think that those numbers are real people's deaths, not just numbers on a screen.

Yes, an overdose is absolutely possible. Young people are dying in droves of an accidental overdose, then and now. It's horrendous. For me the poker party is also surrounded by riddles and a too big void in the information. I can go along with your theories all the way.

Another question. Do you have any idea what the pictures of the men found on Josh's computer are all about? https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/377041/ I hope this is going to work.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Yes, an overdose is absolutely possible. Young people are dying in droves of an accidental overdose, then and now. It's horrendous. For me the poker party is also surrounded by riddles and a too big void in the information. I can go along with your theories all the way.

Another question. Do you have any idea what the pictures of the men found on Josh's computer are all about? https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/377041/ I hope this is going to work.

Without analysing his computer, I can only suggest a couple of things and be sure about them.

1) cached data - when you browse the Web, your computer, or even phone is designed to cache data to make it quicker to load up next time you visit the site. There's a chance those pictures of the men are simply cached photos from Josh's computer. If you go to a dating site, then immediately do a forensic examination of a computer, it'll show pretty much the same thing - it does not mean you interacted with the men (or women), it's just your computer saving data.

2) The photographs were all selfie/portrait style photographs, which indicates they're a profile picture. All of them are likely to be from the dating site (yahoo personals) which ties in with point 1

3) if.... And this is a huge if.... Josh manually saved them, that would probably suggest to me he was either posing as a woman to speak to men online to A) see if any of them have been abused by the monks, B) to troll men by pretending to be a woman or C) because he enjoyed chatting with men

Without knowing exactly how the pictures got on Josh's computer it's very hard to say. I'd suggest that it's more likely 1 & 2 that are correct, but if there was 100% concrete evidence that Josh personally saved every photo himself, the point 3 would be correct.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Yes, an overdose is absolutely possible. Young people are dying in droves of an accidental overdose, then and now. It's horrendous. For me the poker party is also surrounded by riddles and a too big void in the information. I can go along with your theories all the way.

Another question. Do you have any idea what the pictures of the men found on Josh's computer are all about? https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/377041/ I hope this is going to work.

RE: the poker party. I agree. And it's the one part of the entire story surrounding Josh that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I've quite literally printed out pages and tried to connect the dots. I've printed out maps and tried to draw X's where the witnesses said they were when they saw someone who resembled Josh. I'll try to re-create here what I've done offline to show you how the witnesses statements really don't add up at all.

Debunking The "Sightings"

In this picture, I've circled the 3 alleged sightings of "Josh".

According to the Netflix documentary: "some time before midnight" is when Josh was said to have left.

First sighting (marked 'one' on map)

The furthest right red circle 'one' represents the first sighting observed by one eyewitness ("who knows Josh well" Source: Missing: Joshua Guimond | St. Joseph, MN | Uncovered) standing behind a dumpster at Seton Apartments, at 11:57pm on November 9th, 2002. Note: this witness is unidentified.

Second sighting (marked 'two' on map)

Now look at the far left red circle 'two'. This is the 2nd alleged sighting of Josh. A group of eyewitnesses saw [Josh] crossing a culvert in direction of a bus stop on the exit route to I-94.

Third sighting (marked 'three' on map)

Now look at the top red circle 'three' - Netflix's documentary said a couple saw what was thought to be Josh, or someone who resembled Josh walking along the bridge at 12:15-12:30am.

Source:

Joshua Guimond’s Final Journey | BehindThePineCurtain.com

Important to note:

• Assuming the couple of the bridge saw someone at 12:15am - It does not take 18 minutes to get from 'one' (pathway by dumpster) to get to 'two' (bridge) - chances of it being Josh are slim to none in my opinion
• Now assume the couple of the bridge saw someone at 12:30am, the chances of it being Josh are now extremely unlikely - this is an entire 33 minutes after Josh was seen on the pathway by the dumpster ('one' on map)
• The entire trip back from Metten Court to Maur House should've only taken 5 minutes on foot
• The final sighting of Josh is unconfirmed to actually be Josh

What I'd Like to Know

1) Who the person in the first sighting was, who allegedly knew Josh "well" - if this just so happens to be someone from the poker party, that would be incredibly interesting
2) Who were this alleged group of eyewitnesses? Are they reliable witnesses?

Conclusion

To me - the sightings just don't appear to add up. The timing of the person who claims to know Josh well - yet didn't speak to Josh, and just so happened to see Josh walking past the dumpster.... yeah.....right. Sorry, I don't believe it.

I found this video of a youtuber who did a map analysis like myself, and what he says at 2 mins 15 secs to 2 mins 42 seconds is very much what I'm saying:

I stand by my earlier theory. The sightings are dubious at best. And the sighting of Josh walking PAST the dumpsters... it's standing out to me as something I just don't think I believe. It sounds like a diversion. I'd love to know if that witness was at the poker party. They must have been, right??? They just so happened to be behind the dumpster at 11:57pm??? And, just so happened to see Josh walk by..... *rolls eyes*

Therefore my conclusion is that the unidentified witness who claimed Josh walked past the dumpster was actually diverting attention from the dumpster, because I believe they placed Josh in it. If that particular unidentified witness went to the poker party, I’d be hauling them in for interrogation. The fact they didn’t say they spoken to Josh makes sense - they didn’t want to add to their story.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Another day, another attempt to break my own theory. Every single day since posting my theory, I have tried to break it using various different angles. Sometimes I don't post them, but today I thought I would show you the kind of process I'm using to see if my theory holds up.

I went back to the very first episode of the Josh Newville podcast:

Josh Newville: Right. And it doesn't sound like he told anyone explicitly that he had anywhere to be. One of the party attendees, his name is Eric. We're not going to provide last names. And when those names do come up, we're going to bleep them out. But Eric, one of the attendees, if you will, he does specifically recall Josh implying that he had somewhere to be. The way that Eric described it is that there was something about the way that Josh said he needed to go that it strongly suggested he had somewhere to be. That's all we know. And that perception could have been wrong. That perception could have been dead on. Right? We just don't know.

Ted Haller: So, they see Josh leave, right? The people at the get together, they see-

Josh Newville: Some do.

Ted Haller: Some see him leave.

Josh Newville: Yep. And some assume that he's just leaving to go the bathroom. Some assume he's heading back to his dorm. I think there was some uncertainty until he had been gone for a bit whether he had actually left, for some people.

Ted Haller: Are there any accounts of anyone seeing him that night walking somewhere in between the two buildings?

This just strikes me as completely bizarre. The poker party results in multiple completely and utterly different stories.

1) Eric says that Josh said "I need to go" before heading towards the doorway/bathroom area (Simply Vanished Podcast)
2) Another person at the poker party doesn't recall Josh saying anything before heading to the doorway/bathroom area (Simply Vanished Podcast)
3) Another person recalls Josh was going to the bathroom (Netflix documentary)
4) Nate says: “I was standing there looking right at him” (Source: Still Missing in the Midwest | BehindThePineCurtain.com)

Then at 11:57pm on the night of the disappearance, there's the unidentified witness who allegedly knew Josh well (yet didn't speak to Josh) who claimed Josh was walking past the dumpsters.

Every single part of the timeline is smooth, makes sense, it's logical - up until the part where Josh leaves the poker party. As soon as we get to the part where Josh says he is leaving the party, there's multiple conflicting stories, errors with timelines (Nick). Then, some reports say Alex/Greg left at 1am, suggesting the party finished at 1am, and other sites say it was 3am - but Greg/Alex were not on the same floor in Maur house as Josh - whereas Nick shared the 4th floor with Josh. Everything goes completely sour when you analyze the poker party. The different stories is an indicator that this is where it all went wrong.

That's before you factor in Dana who said "that's not the Josh I knew" (Netflix doc) regarding Josh not saying bye before he left - Katie agreed with Dana on this.

This Eric guy. Who is he. What's his friendship to Nate?

I think the only way this gets solved is to interrogate the people at the poker party, and identify the so-called "witness" who claims Josh was walking past the dumpsters. If that witness was at the poker party, and/or good friends with the people at the poker party, then I think this entire thing is a cover-up by a select few.

The weird, conflicting stories, timelines, sightings - it all points to the poker party. I just cannot get past the poker party being the place where something happened to Josh.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Final thought: the unidentified witness was a female according to the Josh Newville podcast. I’m now extremely curious of her friendship/relationship to Eric, Nate and Adam McDonald. Between those 4 people is where our answer lies, I’m convinced at this point.

I’ve spent the last 4-5 hours looking at the angle of a hookup gone badly wrong, but this theory falls flat.

1) Josh didn’t have a mobile phone
2) no evidence of Josh arranging to meet anyone via yahoo chats
3) no evidence of Josh planning to meet anyone at all
4) Josh deleted his yahoo approx 2-4 weeks before he disappeared - so in order to meet someone via this method it would have had to have been pre-arranged for 2-4 weeks - asking someone to meet you at midnight in 2-4 weeks? Unlikely. Forensic analysis of his computer and chats didn’t find evidence of it
5) None of Josh’s friends said he was planning to meet someone
6) Josh hadn’t long split with Katie, the chances of him wanting to meet others was probably a little bit low at this point in time
7) Meeting up with someone at midnight is a very strange time to meet up.. I somewhat doubt it

The midnight hookup theory has too many holes in it.

I hope the police have fully examined the female witness who claimed to know Josh well, and who just so happened to be standing behind a dumpster at the exact time Josh was leaving the party - a time which was given by a very select few people at the poker party. It would not surprise me if that female witness had a relationship with someone at the poker party, or was a blood-relative of someone at the poker party and was in on the coverup.

Every single angle leads me right back to the OD theory. Lets re-look at what we’ve got:

1) poker party stories all over the place - some claim Josh went to the bathroom, others didn’t see/hear anything
2) female “witness” just so happened to be by a dumpster at 11:57pm and claims Josh was walking by, but didn’t speak or interact
3) Nick’s bizarre timeframe
4) Adam deleting/wiping evidence from the computer
5) Nate, Eric, female witness, Adam all avoiding interviews or declining interviews since Josh’s disappearance

Once again, I don’t think the monks are to blame, and I don’t think a hookup gone wrong is to blame. Everything is firmly pointing to the poker party and a coverup by a very select few. I’d suggest 3-5 people in total know the truth about what happened.

 

[Marzipan]

Final thought: the unidentified witness was a female according to the Josh Newville podcast. I’m now extremely curious of her friendship/relationship to Eric, Nate and Adam McDonald. Between those 4 people is where our answer lies, I’m convinced at this point.

I’ve spent the last 4-5 hours looking at the angle of a hookup gone badly wrong, but this theory falls flat.

1) Josh didn’t have a mobile phone
2) no evidence of Josh arranging to meet anyone via yahoo chats
3) no evidence of Josh planning to meet anyone at all
4) Josh deleted his yahoo approx 2-4 weeks before he disappeared - so in order to meet someone via this method it would have had to have been pre-arranged for 2-4 weeks - asking someone to meet you at midnight in 2-4 weeks? Unlikely. Forensic analysis of his computer and chats didn’t find evidence of it
5) None of Josh’s friends said he was planning to meet someone
6) Josh hadn’t long split with Katie, the chances of him wanting to meet others was probably a little bit low at this point in time
7) Meeting up with someone at midnight is a very strange time to meet up.. I somewhat doubt it

The midnight hookup theory has too many holes in it.

I hope the police have fully examined the female witness who claimed to know Josh well, and who just so happened to be standing behind a dumpster at the exact time Josh was leaving the party - a time which was given by a very select few people at the poker party. It would not surprise me if that female witness had a relationship with someone at the poker party, or was a blood-relative of someone at the poker party and was in on the coverup.

Every single angle leads me right back to the OD theory. Lets re-look at what we’ve got:

1) poker party stories all over the place - some claim Josh went to the bathroom, others didn’t see/hear anything
2) female “witness” just so happened to be by a dumpster at 11:57pm and claims Josh was walking by, but didn’t speak or interact
3) Nick’s bizarre timeframe
4) Adam deleting/wiping evidence from the computer
5) Nate, Eric, female witness, Adam all avoiding interviews or declining interviews since Josh’s disappearance

Once again, I don’t think the monks are to blame, and I don’t think a hookup gone wrong is to blame. Everything is firmly pointing to the poker party and a coverup by a very select few. I’d suggest 3-5 people in total know the truth about what happened.

Being 2 months out from the breakup, at that age is high time for looking for someone new, imo, and midnight is an odd time if you might both really like each other but it’s not an odd time for a purely sexual hookup for some young people.
But I don’t think that’s what happened either. It’s just that I can’t come close to proving. Not at all. I thought it was a monk for the longest time, but you’ve convinced me OD is more likely, and more common, than that.
Interesting to hear the witness near the dumpster is thought to be a girl. It’s awfully hard to suspect her of being part of a coverup when we don’t know who she is or what she did that night. To me, it’s entirely possible she’s truthful and correct.
It’s also still possible that someone else on campus tricked him into going somewhere and killed him. Or that something happened we never imagined and somewhere out there is a perpetrator who was never interviewed and got off scot free, just watching everyone enumerating four or five theories that are all wrong.
This won’t be solved until someone finally talks IMO, and probably not through interrogations but on their own.

 

[Marzipan]

Being 2 months out from the breakup, at that age is high time for looking for someone new, imo, and midnight is an odd time if you might both really like each other but it’s not an odd time for a purely sexual hookup for some young people.
But I don’t think that’s what happened either. It’s just that I can’t come close to proving. Not at all. I thought it was a monk for the longest time, but you’ve convinced me OD is more likely, and more common, than that.
Interesting to hear the witness near the dumpster is thought to be a girl. It’s awfully hard to suspect her of being part of a coverup when we don’t know who she is or what she did that night. To me, it’s entirely possible she’s truthful and correct.
It’s also still possible that someone else on campus tricked him into going somewhere and killed him. Or that something happened we never imagined and somewhere out there is a perpetrator who was never interviewed and got off scot free, just watching everyone enumerating four or five theories that are all wrong.
This won’t be solved until someone finally talks IMO, and probably not through interrogations but on their own.

Or of course I should say, until remains are found in the water

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Being 2 months out from the breakup, at that age is high time for looking for someone new, imo, and midnight is an odd time if you might both really like each other but it’s not an odd time for a purely sexual hookup for some young people.
But I don’t think that’s what happened either. It’s just that I can’t come close to proving. Not at all. I thought it was a monk for the longest time, but you’ve convinced me OD is more likely, and more common, than that.
Interesting to hear the witness near the dumpster is thought to be a girl. It’s awfully hard to suspect her of being part of a coverup when we don’t know who she is or what she did that night. To me, it’s entirely possible she’s truthful and correct.
It’s also still possible that someone else on campus tricked him into going somewhere and killed him. Or that something happened we never imagined and somewhere out there is a perpetrator who was never interviewed and got off scot free, just watching everyone enumerating four or five theories that are all wrong.
This won’t be solved until someone finally talks IMO, and probably not through interrogations but on their own.

I’m working on another theory now, but as you say, until someone talks, this one just isn’t getting solved. There’s just far, far too many possibilities, missed opportunities, delays and poor police work.

Josh Newville let it slip that the unidentified witness was female. But again, could she be a relative or in a relationship with someone at the poker party? It seems the police just took her word for it.

I’ve got to play devils advocate.

The big issue is: let’s say my theory is wrong. My 200 hours of research is wrong and Josh didn’t OD, and the female witness did see Josh, that means he went missing around the bridge area, where the dog stopped sniffing his scent. That’s where my new theory needs to focus.

I really, really need to get hold of the saint johns underground tunnel map. There must be someone who has a copy of it? It may not be useful but there’s something I’d really like to analyse.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Ok, so to begin my next theory, I've gone back to basics. This time, I'm going to now assume that the witnesses were correct (more specifically, the one(s) who were outside of the poker party). I initially discounted them because let's be completely honest, the poker party is a complete mishmash of events/stories, it's hard for anyone to follow exactly what happened there.

Here is my event map. Let's break it down.



link to map: https://i.ibb.co/XzCfkJ6/Josh-Route.png

Events after Josh leaves the poker party

11:45pm-12:00am - Josh leaves card game at Metten Court, presumably heading to Saint Maur house

11:57am - Sighting #1 - Josh takes the paved pedestrian walkway passing between the buildings of Seton Apartments, observed by one female eyewitness standing behind dumpster at Seton Apartments. She said she knew Josh well. This is the yellow line that goes from Metten Court to the main road.

Time unknown - Now look at "Sighting #2" (purple, bottom of screenshot). Josh crosses the intersection to the left of Stumpf Lake onto the main campus; observed by group of eyewitnesses crossing culvert in direction of bus stop on exit route to I-94. I looked on google street view and it looks like you'd probably be able to see if someone crossed the intersection near the bridge.

12:15-12:30am - Sighting #3 - A male and female were walking along the road, towards the Metten Court apartments. They say they saw someone matching the description of Josh. I'm going to assume that this was indeed Josh, but their timing was off.

These sightings would mean that Josh made it to the intersection - see the yellow line that gets to the intersection, and takes a right, as if heading to Saint Maur house.

In order to complete the journey to Saint Maur house, Josh had to cross County Road 159; go through a parking lot; and walk around the tennis courts to reach his apartment (this is represented by the red line in the screenshot). There was no electronic record that he used his key card to enter his apartment.

Therefore, I have a blue circle which I believe is the area that Josh ran into trouble.

The pink circle represents the location that someone could have sat in wait, and was watching Josh until the coast was clear.

Now, I go back to the profile from the former FBI-profiler:

The offender likely would have rehearsed his abduction plan. This means that in the months prior to his victim’s disappearance, he used a con or ruse (e.g., asking for assistance or directions, feigning a fall, accident, or injury) to lure a student late at night into a vehicle, to an isolated area concealed from public view, or to an indoor location over which he had a great deal of control (e.g., a basement, garage, or office area).

I feel that if the sightings were all indeed correct (despite them being messy and somewhat inconsistent), that Josh made it to the car park, which is where he ran into foul play. The question is: who? why?

I'll continue my research. Please feel free to post any thoughts and suggestions. It's going to be very difficult to pinpoint who did this. I'm thinking that this could actually be more likely than the OD theory I had. I just need time to work out what happened.

 

[Marzipan]

Ok, so to begin my next theory, I've gone back to basics. This time, I'm going to now assume that the witnesses were correct (more specifically, the one(s) who were outside of the poker party). I initially discounted them because let's be completely honest, the poker party is a complete mishmash of events/stories, it's hard for anyone to follow exactly what happened there.

Here is my event map. Let's break it down.

View attachment 456031

link to map: https://i.ibb.co/XzCfkJ6/Josh-Route.png

Events after Josh leaves the poker party

11:45pm-12:00am - Josh leaves card game at Metten Court, presumably heading to Saint Maur house

11:57am - Sighting #1 - Josh takes the paved pedestrian walkway passing between the buildings of Seton Apartments, observed by one female eyewitness standing behind dumpster at Seton Apartments. She said she knew Josh well. This is the yellow line that goes from Metten Court to the main road.

Time unknown - Now look at "Sighting #2" (purple, bottom of screenshot). Josh crosses the intersection to the left of Stumpf Lake onto the main campus; observed by group of eyewitnesses crossing culvert in direction of bus stop on exit route to I-94. I looked on google street view and it looks like you'd probably be able to see if someone crossed the intersection near the bridge.

12:15-12:30am - Sighting #3 - A male and female were walking along the road, towards the Metten Court apartments. They say they saw someone matching the description of Josh. I'm going to assume that this was indeed Josh, but their timing was off.

These sightings would mean that Josh made it to the intersection - see the yellow line that gets to the intersection, and takes a right, as if heading to Saint Maur house.

In order to complete the journey to Saint Maur house, Josh had to cross County Road 159; go through a parking lot; and walk around the tennis courts to reach his apartment (this is represented by the red line in the screenshot). There was no electronic record that he used his key card to enter his apartment.

Therefore, I have a blue circle which I believe is the area that Josh ran into trouble.

The pink circle represents the location that someone could have sat in wait, and was watching Josh until the coast was clear.

Now, I go back to the profile from the former FBI-profiler:

The offender likely would have rehearsed his abduction plan. This means that in the months prior to his victim’s disappearance, he used a con or ruse (e.g., asking for assistance or directions, feigning a fall, accident, or injury) to lure a student late at night into a vehicle, to an isolated area concealed from public view, or to an indoor location over which he had a great deal of control (e.g., a basement, garage, or office area).

I feel that if the sightings were all indeed correct (despite them being messy and somewhat inconsistent), that Josh made it to the car park, which is where he ran into foul play. The question is: who? why?

I'll continue my research. Please feel free to post any thoughts and suggestions. It's going to be very difficult to pinpoint who did this. I'm thinking that this could actually be more likely than the OD theory I had. I just need time to work out what happened.

Good idea — and good for you for being able to shift to a new theory. Not easy, but critical and I can see the professionalism you bring to this. Plus, your OD theory work is there, it doesn’t disappear and you can go back to it.
Im curious about your interest in the tunnels and Im interested in the theory of abductor known or unknown. Thanks for bringing some new energy to this. Im not sure how long you have been following it but im quite sure there were more old Josh threads that have been unpublished. Maybe Im wrong but I thought there were many. The JacobWetterling case followers were quite interested in Josh because before we knew who took Jacob, St. John’s monks were long looked at. You’ve found the Behind the Pine Curtain so you probably know all this— saying it partly for any newer followers.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Good idea — and good for you for being able to shift to a new theory. Not easy, but critical and I can see the professionalism you bring to this. Plus, your OD theory work is there, it doesn’t disappear and you can go back to it.
Im curious about your interest in the tunnels and Im interested in the theory of abductor known or unknown. Thanks for bringing some new energy to this. Im not sure how long you have been following it but im quite sure there were more old Josh threads that have been unpublished. Maybe Im wrong but I thought there were many. The JacobWetterling case followers were quite interested in Josh because before we knew who took Jacob, St. John’s monks were long looked at. You’ve found the Behind the Pine Curtain so you probably know all this— saying it partly for any newer followers.

I’ve not been following this case for long but I’m in it for the long haul. I’m going to keep going until I get a theory I’m 100% confident on and /or the police discover something.

Regarding the tunnels, I definitely have an idea I’d like to explore, and it was actually my first thought about the case, but without a tunnel map I can’t go any further with it because I’d be making far too many guesses which could send us the wrong way.

That said, I feel that the abductor was someone on campus (although if I learn anything I don’t already know, that could change).

There’s a lot of people who used to comment on this thread - I really need them to return to the forum and if they have it, upload a tunnel map so I can just see if my idea has any potential.