sfbaynancydrew
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 1,323
- Reaction score
- 228
Can the Denver post be trusted as 100%?
As an MSM site, it counts as a valid reference.
Can the Denver post be trusted as 100%?
Ok, lets assume you actually manage to identify the type of wood, (which I'm SURE LE has already done), that wood isn't the only tree in the forest...so to speak. I'm pretty sure there will end up being thousands of places to find the same kind of wood. and that still wouldn't lead to the murderer!
LE has asked the public to think about WHO may have worn a cross like the one they are showing. They have asked the public to think about someone who may be missing this item. They are hoping to identify the cross with a person. They are not asking for information, opinions or speculation about the markings on the cross, the type of wood it is made out of or anything like that. I guess I just don't understand why anyone would be so focused on something like this?
The father said he drove his son to school on Thursday. The father told LE his son confused the days.
I'm not sleuthing the children. wth? I'm trying to keep the account of Jessica's last morning true to what we know so far.
It is a mystery as to why Jessica didn't show up on time to walk with her friend whether it be Thursday or Friday. That is the mystery at hand.
Please refrain from telling me what to post.
The only thing on 9 news
The Denver Post article of the timeline. The normally walk to the park but this time she was going to meet the boy at his house and then walk to school with him. After she didn't arrive and there was 10 minutes to the bell the boy and his father drove to school. This is the current facts the police are going on based on recent articles.
Well that just sounds all wrong and doesn't make sense to me at all.:waitasec::waitasec:
If the reason they were being driven was because it was so cold, why would Jessica walk all the way to the friends house? Why not just pick her up on the way?
Maybe Jessica was not 100% truthful with her mother and said she was headed to the park when in fact she planned to walk to the friend's house.
:moo::moo::moo::moo:
Not to mention Jessica's mother clearly saying that she left to meet her friend at the park.
Does this mean that all along LE knew Jessica was possibly headed in the other direction when she left home that morning?
Or does the Denver Post have it wrong?
I think the reason is that while there are many similar crosses out there, they aren't all made of the same types of wood.
If, for instance, the cross in the photo were made of some unusual wood found only in Costa Rica, that might help narrow down the origin of the cross, and the place it might have been purchased in the US.
I thought we couldn't say anything about Jessicas friends dad?
If we can, please let me know.
Was he cleared? I thought he was.
As an MSM site, it counts as a valid reference.
Here is the scanner thread. You can find out which day dad said he drove his son here.The father said he drove his son to school on Thursday. The father told LE his son confused the days.
I'm not sleuthing the children. wth? I'm trying to keep the account of Jessica's last morning true to what we know so far.
It is a mystery as to why Jessica didn't show up on time to walk with her friend whether it be Thursday or Friday. That is the mystery at hand.
Please refrain from telling me what to post.
The origin of the cross, could point to Jessica's killer, especially if it is handmade from remnants of old wood etc.
The type of wood is very important, IMO. It does not appear to be a mass produced necklace to me, which could narrow down a suspect.
I agree. At first I couldn't see why it would be important but I think the type of wood could lead to the fact that it was bought or homemade.
I'm an Aussie to and I've heard of red blood wood (from the coast of NSW and QLD) and a dessert blood wood which I've heard is from NT, especially Alice Springs area. I believe there may also be a WA blood wood too but haven't searched to confirm yet.
Obviously if it were Australian blood wood he probably hasn't made it himself at home, so has most likely bought it from somewhere not so well known.
Read the Denver post article from today you got everything backwards.
New evidence found in that location has to have been put there after the body was discovered, don't you all think?
Sorry, but it is late, I have had a coupla beers. Please explain the above post to me. What does it mean? I don't understand the statement. tia
If "Daisy" knows that "Michael" had a Denibian Slime stone cross because he talked about it, but she had never seen it, and LE had said "We're trying to match this Denibian Slime stone cross with someone." Then "Daisy" might think to contact LE. But LE didn't. They just show a cross, and don't say what it is made of. So perhaps posters thinks "Hey, if we identify that wood, then people might think of a conversation with someone regarding having a cross made with XXXX type of wood, even if they never actually saw the cross."Ok...this will be my last post about the "wood" and I "get" all that, but it still WILL NOT identify the murderer!!! and if LE thought the type of wood was significant, don't you think they would already know what the thing is made out of? They do have it in their possession....and access to the world's foremost experts if needed...pretty sure they know this answer that everyone is struggling to find! So, my original question still stands....what's the point?