Dan Rassier: Former POI **Wrongly accused**

[cGorg]

Why not go to DR with Heinrichs car at the beginning?

1. 5 days after the abduction and supposedly after clear evidence he was taken by a car, they for some reason now search DR's property. LE has a reason to believe already that Jacob may have never left this spot at all.

2. It had been two months before heinrichs tires were compared to the scene, when they finally get the tires compared there was nothing conclusive to suggest its involvement. Therefore we don't have to ask DR.

What LE has said

Tire tracks and footprints found at the scene are a match to heinrich, but not conclusive.

You ask some good questions.....but....how do you explain Heinrich's shoeprint found at the scene?

 

[Sasquatch321]

You ask some good questions.....but....how do you explain Heinrich's shoeprint found at the scene?

I've been waiting for this question. Simple, stick to the facts, there is no footprint that is conclusively heinrichs at the scene. The media has twisted and turned the way they discuss this. Consistently yes, conclusively no.

 

[cGorg]

Don't blame me though. LE named him a poi, LE won't discuss him, LE has his properties, LE said he changed his stories, LE changed their theory to a perp on foot without explanation yet, LE will not clear him despite pleas from every direction. LE is holding items that they last declared are awaiting advancement in technology.

This is what I see, this is what I know. It's up to them to change it. <modsnip>

I don't think we can assume that LE is infallible. Doesn't mean they're conspiratorial as they are people too. LE could have made innocent mistakes. It would be understandable especially in a case like this.

 

[Sasquatch321]

I don't think we can assume that LE is infallible. Doesn't mean they're conspiratorial as they are people too. LE could have made innocent mistakes. It would be understandable especially in a case like this.

They made tons of mistakes to get where they are at today. But look now, that ghost of 25 years is on the table and they are on the brink of solving this case as well. To sit here and call out mistakes and corruption and then have them solve the case in front of my face tomorrow, just simply isn't going to happen.

 

[cGorg]

I've been waiting for this question. Simple, stick to the facts, there is no footprint that is conclusively heinrichs at the scene. The media has twisted and turned the way they discuss this. Consistently yes, conclusively no.

Heinrich submitted his shoes and let LE remove his car tires. They were "consistent" as you say. Just what do you need to make this "conclusive"? What are the chances that his shoeprints AND his tire prints were a consistent match to what was found at the crime scene? Did DR happen to have shoes(although of a much larger size) as well as a vehicle with tire prints that matched-at least consistently? I think you should direct your questions to LE to ask why, given this info, the diversion to DR.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Heinrich submitted his shoes and let LE remove his car tires. They were "consistent" as you say. Just what do you need to make this "conclusive"? What are the chances that his shoeprints AND his tire prints were a consistent match to what was found at the crime scene? Did DR happen to have shoes(although of a much larger size) as well as a vehicle with tire prints that matched-at least consistently? I think you should direct your questions to LE to ask why, given this info, the diversion to DR.

What do you need to turn the current consistency into conclusivity?

Alot more. 3 more tires, sizes, and more of the scene.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Heinrich submitted his shoes and let LE remove his car tires. They were "consistent" as you say. Just what do you need to make this "conclusive"? What are the chances that his shoeprints AND his tire prints were a consistent match to what was found at the crime scene? Did DR happen to have shoes(although of a much larger size) as well as a vehicle with tire prints that matched-at least consistently? I think you should direct your questions to LE to ask why, given this info, the diversion to DR.

Ok so that is a good point about if DR had not just one but maybe 5 or 6 cars sitting about the farm. In at least one picture of the farm I saw there appeared to be at least 3 old and stored vehicles next to an outbuilding.

 

[cGorg]

Ok so that is a good point about if DR had not just one but maybe 5 or 6 cars sitting about the farm. In at least one picture of the farm I saw there appeared to be at least 3 old and stored vehicles next to an outbuilding.

Sorry to say but I think you may be missing my point....and that is: (1)What are the chances that shoe + tire prints found at the crime scene match "consistently" with Heinrich? and (2)what are the chances that these crime scene prints match anything of DR's(shoe + tires). IMO....it is the former that has the high probability....not the latter

 

[cGorg]

Is it possible that DR never saw a photo of Heinrichs car until last year? Hence the comment "I'm not sure, I would have to see that kind of car turn around again"

When LE had the car and tires in 1990 did they not ask the only witness to a vehicle then? Wouldn't DR have recently said "this is the same car they have shown me before" Is it because the vehicle had no relevance to the scene whatsoever?

It's possible(that LE didn't ask DR for confirmation). He gave them info regarding the cars on 10-23-1989. I think the vehicle had relevance...it is THE vehicle IMO. But it reinforces DR's statement that he would need to see the car again under similar conditions as opposed to pictures of the car itself under different lighting conditions.

 

[ELOCsoul]

Sorry to say but I think you may be missing my point....and that is: (1)What are the chances that shoe + tire prints found at the crime scene match "consistently" with Heinrich? and (2)what are the chances that these crime scene prints match anything of DR's(shoe + tires). IMO....it is the former that has the high probability....not the latter

In addition to this very strong circumstantial evidence, we also have heavy suggestion from the Paynesville police that they should look for Heinrich to be the kidnapper. Now the odds become quite heavy that Heinrch is the guy. Now, further add the 100% DNA match to Jared, and LE being certain that those cases were related. IMO that leaves no room for doubt.

 

[Wisdom]

In addition to this very strong circumstantial evidence, we also have heavy suggestion from the Paynesville police that they should look for Heinrich to be the kidnapper. Now the odds become quite heavy that Heinrch is the guy. Now, further add the 100% DNA match to Jared, and LE being certain that those cases were related. IMO that leaves no room for doubt.

No room for doubt in my opinion either. With the tires and shoe prints we have to keep in mind that his shoes were given on Jan 12th & the tires on Jan 15th 1990. Nearly 3 months after the abduction... which means additional wear and tear on the soles of his shoes and the tire tread. Long enough to develop new specific wear marks on both.. which probably explains LE only being able to match the size / tread etc... since things changed from what the casts showed on scene 3 months earlier.

 

[Sasquatch321]

No room for doubt in my opinion either. With the tires and shoe prints we have to keep in mind that his shoes were given on Jan 12th & the tires on Jan 15th 1990. Nearly 3 months after the abduction... which means additional wear and tear on the soles of his shoes and the tire tread. Long enough to develop new specific wear marks on both.. which probably explains LE only being able to match the size / tread etc... since things changed from what the casts showed on scene 3 months earlier.

That is plausible I suppose.

 

[Trackergd]

No room for doubt in my opinion either. With the tires and shoe prints we have to keep in mind that his shoes were given on Jan 12th & the tires on Jan 15th 1990. Nearly 3 months after the abduction... which means additional wear and tear on the soles of his shoes and the tire tread. Long enough to develop new specific wear marks on both.. which probably explains LE only being able to match the size / tread etc... since things changed from what the casts showed on scene 3 months earlier.

The wear on the shoes would still show the same wear patterns unique to the person who wears them. There may have been additional cuts etc, but the wear patterns would remain the same. They are as unique as finger prints.

The tire wear would mostly affect the depth. In a three month period, only hitting a major obstruction would significantly change the pattern. What could change the tire wear pattern is a front end misalignment (caster, camber, toe in or toe out) or shock failure (cupping). The design of the tread would remain as well as any damage previously recorded in the plaster casts and photographs.

 

[Sasquatch321]

The wear on the shoes would still show the same wear patterns unique to the person who wears them. There may have been additional cuts etc, but the wear patterns would remain the same. They are as unique as finger prints.

The tire wear would mostly affect the depth. In a three month period, only hitting a major obstruction would significantly change the pattern. What could change the tire wear pattern is a front end misalignment (caster, camber, toe in or toe out) or shock failure (cupping). The design of the tread would remain as well as any damage previously recorded in the plaster casts and photographs.

It was a plausible idea though.

 

[human]

Our beloved Administrator Bessie needs our help

We are asking for donations
Check out Bessie's new update and you'll see your donations are helping

Go to .com/adminbessie to donate and click on "Updates" to read the latest

Just in case anyone else has somehow missed this message from Tricia, LIKE ME I am putting a copy in several threads that I post in.

Dear Websleuths Members,

Our wonderful Websleuths Administrator Bessie really needs our help.

Bessie's husband is battling Esophageal cancer. It has left him underweight and extremely weak. He is trying to regain strength so they can operate and remove the cancerous tumor.

Bessie's husband is the only breadwinner. Why? Because Bessie has spent all her free time helping run Websleuths. The time Bessie has volunteered to make sure Webslueths runs smoothly is immeasurable.

Since her husband's illness Bessie has been taking care of him full time.

A few weeks ago Bessie was shopping. She collapsed. Her heart stopped in the ambulance. Her heart stopped again in the ER. She was in a coma for days.
Through some miracle, Bessie is back home. She is weak but she is still taking care of her husband and trying to take care of herself too.

Bessie is on the verge of losing her home. The bills are piling up and there is no end in site.

If you can donate a single dollar to Bessie it will be a great help.

Many of you have offered me money to help with the cost of running Websleuths. I don't take donations but if you still want to donate please donate to Bessie.

If you enjoy Websleuths then you are enjoying Bessie's hard work.

It has been very hard to operate Websleuths without Bessie. It's only because of the rest of the hard working Mods and Admins that Websleuths continues on.

If you would like to use PayPal to make a donation to Bessie go to www.paypal.com and enter email bessiesmith615@gmail.com

If you would rather donate through Bessie's Go Fund Me page please do so by clicking here
On behalf of Websleuths management thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Tricia Griffith
Owner/Websleuths.com


MESSAGE FROM DMACKY
MESSAGE FROM Dmacky added on:

 

[Sasquatch321]

This mans family and his own self image has been completely destroyed. We now factually know Heinrich is the abductor. It's too late now, the damage has already been done. And even though we found Jacobs abductor, Dan's life will continue to be destroyed based on LE's incompetence to clear him.

 

[Sasquatch321]

"They blew it back then and they blew it again in 2004" DR

Lets play fair, you blew it that night and you blew it when Patty asked you to confess in 2009. Remember? Somebody could have taken Jacob and buried him in our gravel pit. Yeah DR asked for it alright, first he is not reporting the vehicle he saw until two investigators went to his work the next morning, secondly 20 years after the kidnapping he is saying the vehicle never left and someone buried Jacob back in the gravel pit. That someone looks like DR.

 

[human]

How did they blow it in 2004?

 

[Sasquatch321]

How did they blow it in 2004?

By shifting the blame to someone local and on foot. Basically DR. DR in 2009 even does away with a vehicle by saying someone buried Jacob in his gravel pit that night. Unless he also thinks Heinrich returned a year later or two to bury him back there.

 

[ELOCsoul]

By shifting the blame to someone local and on foot. Basically DR. DR in 2009 even does away with a vehicle by saying someone buried Jacob in his gravel pit that night. Unless he also thinks Heinrich returned a year later or two to bury him back there.

My guess is that LE convinced DR that they knew it was done on foot, and they knew Jacob never left the property (all BS, of course). DR subsequently processes that info, and probably somewhat believes it, and develops in his mind what he believed was a logical scenario. Given DRs quirkiness, I think this is how all of that played out.