Norway Norway - Oslo - WhtFem 20-30 - Fake Name - Shot in Hotel Room - Jun'95 #2

New Posts

A couple of things that have always annoyed me about the investigation was some lazy assumptions that were made by the original investigators.

The first was assuming that JF just pulled the name Cerberus out of the air without knowing the proper spelling when it was the front desk clerk who typed in the name as 'Cerbis' when they took the information over the phone. We'll never know if JF spelled it that way or the clerk typed in what they heard. And I doubt we'll ever get any verification regarding that because one of the front desk managers has always claimed that they always request the proper documentation when taking down information. We know that's not true because one of the guests in 2818 also said when they checked in the desk didn't ask them to fill in a registration card. So oversights occurred during the same time period JF was a guest.

Another thing is the initial investigators assumed that the logo on the briefcase was an elephant. Seriously? It didn't look anything like an elephant. If they had actually contacted the manufacturer Braun Buffel they would have known that Buffel is German for buffalo. It makes them look lazy. I know there was a strike going on at that time which included LE so perhaps that is what created such a lackadaisical response to a supposed suicide and why it took nearly an hour to get to the hotel from the initial call from hotel security.
 
branmuffin said:
A couple of things that have always annoyed me about the investigation was some lazy assumptions that were made by the original investigators.

The first was assuming that JF just pulled the name Cerberus out of the air without knowing the proper spelling when it was the front desk clerk who typed in the name as 'Cerbis' when they took the information over the phone. We'll never know if JF spelled it that way or the clerk typed in what they heard. And I doubt we'll ever get any verification regarding that because one of the front desk managers has always claimed that they always request the proper documentation when taking down information. We know that's not true because one of the guests in 2818 also said when they checked in the desk didn't ask them to fill in a registration card. So oversights occurred during the same time period JF was a guest.

Another thing is the initial investigators assumed that the logo on the briefcase was an elephant. Seriously? It didn't look anything like an elephant. If they had actually contacted the manufacturer Braun Buffel they would have known that Buffel is German for buffalo. It makes them look lazy. I know there was a strike going on at that time which included LE so perhaps that is what created such a lackadaisical response to a supposed suicide and why it took nearly an hour to get to the hotel from the initial call from hotel security.
Click to expand...

You make some good points, I think. It has to be borne in mind, however, that we are all looking at and assessing this with the benefit of nearly three decades of hindsight. Moreover, that hindsight is only exists because a newspaper wrote an article and Netflix made documentary about it.

The police at the time, in my opinion, didn't really have much reason to look at it in great depth. It was a suicide and, when you think about it dispassionately, it was only a suicide. That's harsh but, in reality, that's all it was. It isn't the job of the police to expend lots of resources trying to find the identity of a random suicide victim if there is no crime associated with it. Yes, it was an unusual suicide due to the particular circumstances but a suicide nonetheless.

I believe that the police did try to trace the origin of the pistol at the time but without success mostly because the numbers had been removed. Even then, it would probably have got them nowhere as it's most probably a parts gun made from bits of different guns.
 
Marantz4250b said:
You make some good points, I think. It has to be borne in mind, however, that we are all looking at and assessing this with the benefit of nearly three decades of hindsight. Moreover, that hindsight is only exists because a newspaper wrote an article and Netflix made documentary about it.

The police at the time, in my opinion, didn't really have much reason to look at it in great depth. It was a suicide and, when you think about it dispassionately, it was only a suicide. That's harsh but, in reality, that's all it was. It isn't the job of the police to expend lots of resources trying to find the identity of a random suicide victim if there is no crime associated with it. Yes, it was an unusual suicide due to the particular circumstances but a suicide nonetheless.

I believe that the police did try to trace the origin of the pistol at the time but without success mostly because the numbers had been removed. Even then, it would probably have got them nowhere as it's most probably a parts gun made from bits of different guns.
Click to expand...
BBM. Again, this is speculation because this was from an unofficial and unnamed source in the VG article-nothing official at all. See my post: Norway - Norway - Oslo - WhtFem 20-30 - Fake Name - Shot in Hotel Room - Jun'95 #2
 
Marantz4250b said:
You make some good points, I think. It has to be borne in mind, however, that we are all looking at and assessing this with the benefit of nearly three decades of hindsight. Moreover, that hindsight is only exists because a newspaper wrote an article and Netflix made documentary about it.

The police at the time, in my opinion, didn't really have much reason to look at it in great depth. It was a suicide and, when you think about it dispassionately, it was only a suicide. That's harsh but, in reality, that's all it was. It isn't the job of the police to expend lots of resources trying to find the identity of a random suicide victim if there is no crime associated with it. Yes, it was an unusual suicide due to the particular circumstances but a suicide nonetheless.

I believe that the police did try to trace the origin of the pistol at the time but without success mostly because the numbers had been removed. Even then, it would probably have got them nowhere as it's most probably a parts gun made from bits of different guns.
Click to expand...
<modsnip - personalizing>

The death is undetermined hence the Netflix documentary.

Everything points towards a murder, staged as a suicide.

<modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Marantz4250b said:
You make some good points, I think. It has to be borne in mind, however, that we are all looking at and assessing this with the benefit of nearly three decades of hindsight. Moreover, that hindsight is only exists because a newspaper wrote an article and Netflix made documentary about it.

The police at the time, in my opinion, didn't really have much reason to look at it in great depth. It was a suicide and, when you think about it dispassionately, it was only a suicide. That's harsh but, in reality, that's all it was. It isn't the job of the police to expend lots of resources trying to find the identity of a random suicide victim if there is no crime associated with it. Yes, it was an unusual suicide due to the particular circumstances but a suicide nonetheless.

I believe that the police did try to trace the origin of the pistol at the time but without success mostly because the numbers had been removed. Even then, it would probably have got them nowhere as it's most probably a parts gun made from bits of different guns.
Click to expand...
Further, many people - including myself as well as security experts such as Ola Kaldager - believe that this is intelligence related. Everything we see points to it (and not to some random nobody like that Australian man, which most people could guess; a hobo)...

My guess is that it relates to Russia/Belarus and former Soviet Union.
 
<modsnip>
Oslo police changed it from suicide to murder then back to suicide. Where it stands now I dont know. If it's back and fourth it means basically that it is undetermined. Norwegian police doesn't work the same way as American police. In America it would have been 'undetermined' from the beginning.

<modsnip>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The weapons expert (I give credit for this, you appear to have some knowledge and expertise with guns), how do you explain the gun is still in her hand?

Ola Kaldager says it would have been thrown out of her hand. <modsnip - not an approved source>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
InternetDetective said:
Actually I dont. And Oslo police changed it from suicide to murder then back to suicide. Where it stands now I dont know. If it's back and fourth it means basically that it is undetermined. Norwegian police doesn't work the same way as American police. In America it would have been 'undetermined' from the beginning.

I just submitted a tip to Oslo police as well as the people with VG. We have to wait and see.
Click to expand...
Please provide a link per forum rules the cause of death was officially changed from suicide, to murder and back to suicide again. Thanks.
 
InternetDetective said:
The weapons expert (I give credit for this, you appear to have some knowledge and expertise with guns), how do you explain the gun is still in her hand?

Ola Kaldager says it would have been thrown out of her hand. <modsnip - not an approved source>
Click to expand...
I have never shot myself with a gun nor have I done any experiments of her situation. But I do think it is all but certain that she pulled the trigger and the gun remained in her hand. Why? It would have been virtually impossible for another person to put that gun in her hand in the state it was in, trigger depressed and round at the ready for the next trigger pull. It would have required a round to be fired to do so.

I have not asked to be a qualified firearms expert here. I just have several hobbies and one of them happens to be firearms.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So many strange elements to this case but I've been coming back to the room service interaction given that's the last time someone saw 'Jennifer' alive. Specifically, the 50kr note which the maid who delivered the meal considered to be extravagant. (VG article), 10 kr was a typical amount. Given the lengths taken to disguise identify and keep a low-key, this seems almost at odds with not drawing attention to herself. Why such an amount?
The possibilities (combinations are possible):
- She was used to staying at high-class hotels around the world and regarded such a tip as being commensurate with other countries. Also, at 1845kr per night, maybe 50kr doesn't seem so much. However this might suggest some unfamiliarity with tipping customs around the world and in Norway, and therefore hasn't been in the country long, before and/or had substantive interactions locally.
- She had no idea how much 50kr actually represented as value. As above last line, re:unfamiliarity.
- She had no other money of a lesser denomination. There are a few ways this could work out. Similar but different to the above, when she had obtained money for her stay that's the lowest denomination that she was given. Seems perfectly reasonable to me, setting aside the relative value of the tip, it doesn't seem to be a ridiculously high amount by itself for a note. Maybe she hadn't made any purchases to break it down. Or maybe she moved in a largely cash-based world (as supported by her/their intention to pay for the stay by cash).
- She had no other money full stop. There wasn't any found in her room. But then there wasn't much of anything found in her room. This could in my opinion point to suicide (no use for money at all, perhaps a secret apology knowing what a staff member was going to discover in that room), or that she was expecting her stay to end shortly and she would move on, that any money (along with anything else not found in her room) was located elsewhere (Intelligence Agent in the documentary said it typical for operatives to have a second base) or any money was removed by a third party.
- She thought she was paying for the meal rather than tipping. I don't know how much the meal in itself cost. Also, no info on the exchange between 'Jennifer' and the maid who brought the meal. A bit left field this one, room-service and how it operates was a well-established concept even in 1995 but struck me late given that's it the only evidence that she had any means to pay for an aspect of her visit.

All-in-all, there's something in there that could fit with most people's theories and opinions. I thought working through it might suggest something more heavily but no, so apologies it's a laundry list of options.

Such a frustrating case. Someone out there knows her, (hopefully) misses her. With the passage of time, I find it hard that no-one at all recognises her unless they are somewhere where the case has never reached (Although in my opinion it's unhelpful that the drawings of her face circulated by VG don't 100% look like the manipulated photo of her face in the same article).
Whatever happened in her shortlife, I think she deserves more than an unmarked grave.
 
"With the passage of time, I find it hard that no-one at all recognises her unless they are somewhere where the case has never reached..."

Such as Russia and Belarus. I believe this is where she is from. DDR was filled with Russians.

The tip I regard as irrelevant. I am sure they have received such amounts from other guest being and international five star hotel. It was just an unusual or unusually large tip.
 
I wonder where she was during the two years before her disappearance and being found dead in Oslo?
 
InternetDetective said:
<modsnip>
Oslo police changed it from suicide to murder then back to suicide. Where it stands now I dont know. If it's back and fourth it means basically that it is undetermined. Norwegian police doesn't work the same way as American police. In America it would have been 'undetermined' from the beginning.

<modsnip>
Click to expand...
I'm not aware of that being the case. Do you have evidence of that?
 
InternetDetective said:
The weapons expert (I give credit for this, you appear to have some knowledge and expertise with guns), how do you explain the gun is still in her hand?

Ola Kaldager says it would have been thrown out of her hand. <modsnip - not an approved source>
Click to expand...
As the mod says, not an approved source. Who is he anyway? Some guy on a TV documentary!

It's interesting that many people seem to assume that anyone connected with "intelligence", by default, also knows everything about firearms and is qualified to speak about them.

In my experience - which I'm guessing is probably greater than the guy in the documentary along with the vast majority of people on here, it's usually a very bad idea to talk of firearms related matters in terms of certainties; the words "would", "will", "definitely", "impossible", etc, etc, etc are words to stay away from unless you are speaking of something which is actually contrary to the accepted laws of physics. You can usually spot someone who is not really all that knowledgeable because they talk in terms of certainties. I think it's because they fear being challenged on it. Just my opinion though.

The other subject I've followed on WS is the Lucy Letby case, the case of the nurse in the UK who is charged with multiple counts of murder and attempted murder. Several medical experts have given evidence and I cannot recall any of them stating anything as being "certain". Experts rarely deal in certainties.

Anyway, the upshot of all that is that it is far from a certainty, in my opinion, that the gun would have been thrown from her hand. I'm not sure there is even evidence to show that it would be more likely than not to have been thrown from her hand.
 
Last edited:
GatorFL said:
I have never shot myself with a gun nor have I done any experiments of her situation. But I do think it is all but certain that she pulled the trigger and the gun remained in her hand. Why? It would have been virtually impossible for another person to put that gun in her hand in the state it was in, trigger depressed and round at the ready for the next trigger pull. It would have required a round to be fired to do so.

I have not asked to be a qualified firearms expert here. I just have several hobbies and one of them happens to be firearms.
Click to expand...
"it would have required a round to be fired to do so"

Such as that 'test shot' fired into the pillow, perhaps post, rather than ante-mortem?

No expertise in field of firearms, but in other areas here - can see many arguments for both suicide and homicide (staged as suicide), in accordance with the items found on the victim and on scene.

Given the reasonings of posters with obvious expertise and insight on thread, I'm still unsure about the lack of any residue (blood or gunshot) apparent on hand(s), especially in relation to visual evidence that possibly speaks to external trauma, ante-mortem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 202 more.
Total: 3,789 (members: 203, guests: 3,586)

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,586
Total visitors
3,789
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,440
Messages
17,987,541
Members
229,141
Latest member
AJAY0618
Back
Top