FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #11

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
One point of information I believe that the condo complex was under construction and I don't believe that there were very many people living there at the time.
 
And before anyone gets too excited about the dog following a scent from where the Jennifer's car was parked back to her complex, there's a perfectly good reason for that.

It could be the person who parked Jennifer's car wanted to return it to her space in her complex. However, the driver arrived at the complex to find that the family was already there. So, the driver went a mile down the street and parked it at the other apartment complex.

So, whenever everybody thought the dog was following the driver's scent back as he/she walked back to Jennifer's complex, in fact, the dog was following the scent of the car as it came from Jennifer's complex to its final parking space. This makes even more sense when we figure that the police had nothing to clue the dog into what it was supposed to be smelling since the police had nothing that the driver was wearing.

They might've let the dog climb into the car so it knew what it was supposed to smell instead. Well, since you can't ask the dog what it smells, we are left to guess what catches its nose's attention. It might've been plastic or cloth in the car, instead of a person.
 
1911ss, that's a good point about the place being "under construction". I looked up the complex. It has 451 units. Let's say half weren't built yet. That leaves 225 constructed units. Let's say the average occupancy is 1.5 people per unit. That's roughly 330 residents. Let's say 25% had already left for work that day.

That leaves 247 people who saw nor heard anything.

Even if we drop it down to a 33% occupancy rate, that still leaves over 160 people who saw nor heard anything.

It's just a bit of a stretch for me to believe they all would've been oblivious to what was going on outside their condos.

I'd also add that on that morning at 7:30am, the temperature was in the high 40's. Beautiful FL day but a bit chilly. I've never seen any mention that any of Jennifer's coats were missing. I've heard an outfit is missing. But not a coat. That also makes me suspect she didn't disappear that morning.

The night before's temperature? 60 degrees F at 10pm. Not warm but certainly she could've been comfortable with a long sleeved shirt if she was going out. Thus, a coat wouldn't be missing.
 
This statement was in a very early report--Feb. 7, 2006--from Channel 9 in Orlando.

"Police are confirming that Jennifer may have left her home at Mosaic at Millenia on Monday night or Tuesday morning looking for a roadside mailbox to mail a package. They will not say where or whether she made it there, but the package is also missing."

It's funny how over time these kinds of details get dropped or forgotten. And really, there's not been one piece of evidence since then that disproves this could've been the case--that Jennifer left her condo Monday night and was abducted then, not Tuesday morning.
 
I know the family seems to believe she was taken that morning but who knows? Your guess is as good as any.

I did get the chance to ride by the HOG condos where her car was left...really rough area just around the way from her condo.
 
I wonder what outfit was missing? If it was a work outfit that would be a pretty good indicator of when it happened.
 
marable said:
She will also be featured on Crime Watch Daily tomorrow ,Tuesday 3/22....it is on NBC, Channel 3 in my area....the previews were pretty sad, Drew is talking to Jennifer with tears in his eyes and his voice breaking saying, "I WILL find you"! How so very sad that these loving parents have had to endure this nightmare for the past 10 years....Someone know's something but apparently lack the decency to come forward and reveal what they know....The Kesse's have come to terms that finding her alive is not probable and only ask that her remains be returned to
them....Is that REALLY too much to ask????
Click to expand...

Thanks for your post, it is such a sad case, and the poor family. I know if my co-worker did not show up for work, we would just keep trying her - I have to say for a day or two. Maybe it seems odd, but I am being truthful. The first day, you would be like, maybe "he/she" lost their phone, the 2nd day, if we didn't hear, we would possibly call a house phone, if we had hers, anyway, my point is that maybe someone who called it in so quickly had something to do with this?

Gone, but not forgotten, the dad's love of his daughter is profoundly evident.
 
Recently a young teen girl was kidnapped from in front of a drug store in broad daylight in front of witnesses basically no one really noticed. She had driven to the drug store to return a DVD and was forced back into her vehicle and driven to a location where she was murdered. People that saw her thought she had an argument with her boyfriend. There were no articles left on the ground.. Here is the case:

http://www.insideedition.com/headli...ng-teen-who-went-missing-on-her-way-to-church
 
Where are you Jennifer?
It's always good to see activity in her thread.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1911ss said:
I wonder what outfit was missing? If it was a work outfit that would be a pretty good indicator of when it happened.
Click to expand...

I have been under the impression that this was one of the reasons it had initially been assumed that she was abducted in the morning. I know that I have read that her favorite shoes were missing.

More generally, her briefcase and iPod were missing, in addition to her phone. While I don't know what items she would have typically been carrying on her when she left for work on a given morning, all items which were missing were items that I assume she would have likely had on her when she left her condo in the morning. Whereas it seems like everything that typically would have been left in her condo and car, was later found in her condo and car. To me, that combined with LE/family sentiment is the biggest thing that suggests a parking lot esque abduction.

But a daylight parking lot abduction would seem brazen and unlikely to begin with, and there were supposedly lots of landscapers/contractors/etc on property by 7 AM or so and none are known to have reported seeing anything (or her car). And while it hasn't been officially confirmed, it is said that phone records reveal she had left the house the night before, and that her phone stopped pinging around 10:40 pm, and that given the model of her phone, it would have kept pinging if it had simply been turned off (no clue what airplane mode would have done and I don't think the battery would have drained completely before a forced shutdown). (source for this stuff is Blink on Crime and it is supposedly from the case files)

So it is almost like she spent the night with a guy who stole her keys and phone when she was sleeping or not looking or what not, counting on her to need a ride in the morning. But I'm not sure that makes sense either. I mean her disappearance just doesn't really make sense. It's a puzzle with irregularly shaped pieces, or something to that effect.
 
Broad daylight abductions happen all the time, it is not that uncommon. I just gave an example 3 posts up. Also there were women (some with children) taken and driven in their own cars right in Florida and no one saw it happen. Randi Gorenberg, Nancy Bochicchio and her daughter were killed, another woman and her son got away. The guy who murdered these woman could even be the same person who took Jennifer. http://www.whokilledme.tv/case_data.php?data_id=3

Dru Sjodin, Kelsey Ann Smith, Brooke Wilburger, and Cynthia Moreland are more examples of women taken and murdered out of a parking lot. Just google "woman abducted from parking lot" and you will see how common it is and in broad daylight and even with witnesses.
 
I can see why a daylight abduction makes sense to some people. I realize they happen. But it's the overall picture of the case and its facts that I think reveal something other than Jennifer being seized as she went to work that Tuesday morning.

First, I have a hard time visualizing how this all went down. I know it seems obvious: A couple guys were hanging outside her condo. She exits. They attack her. Throw Jennifer and her stuff in her car and take off.

But there are a lot of details left out of that scenario that are a stretch for me. So, the guys were kind of just standing around in broad daylight waiting for her? Nobody saw them? Jennifer didn't see them when she left her condo? (Keep in mind: She'd expressed to others she was fearful of the men working in her complex. So, her awareness would've been heightened) Why would they take her car? Didn't they have their own? Did they throw her in the front seat or the back seat? Or, was she forced to drive somewhere at gun point? Why, in attacking her, would the guys make sure ALL of her work stuff got put in the car as well--weren't they pressed for time, fearing they'd get caught?

Furthermore, so . . . they get to wherever they're going. These guys take the time to take ALL of Jennifer's work stuff out of the car BUT they leave the DVD (CD?) player in the car? That just seems weird to me. I mean, of everything that was in that car including Jennifer's work stuff, the DVD player would've been the easiest thing to liquidate if the abductors wanted to make a couple bucks off the whole deal. To be clear: They took her phone. They took the phone Jennifer was supposed to return. They took her laptop . . . but didn't take the DVD player? In fact, the player was in the exact same place in the car where Jennifer put it days before that. So . . . in the entire attack, and the throwing of Jennifer into her car, the DVD player never got thrown to the floor? Never got thrown out of the car? Never got damaged? Despite multiple people being in the car . . . in both the front and back seat? Once again, seems strange.

See, it's the taking of the car, to me, that really puts the biggest hole in the daylight abduction theory. Once again, we all know of many kidnappings of women because we're into disappearances and unsolved crimes. And when I think about a woman disappearing, and her car being parked somewhere else hours or days later, it's usually a case of a woman being out somewhere . . . a bar, work, a boyfriend's house, Walmart, etc. . . . and being attacked, not at home. Not on her walk from her condo to her car. Why? Because taking a victim's car from her residence is THE EASIEST WAY to get caught. And the reason the car is moved somewhere else in the usual cases is to take attention away from the bar, the workplace, the boyfriend's house, the Walmart, etc. So, taking the car from a residence is a way to get caught; moving the car from anywhere else is a way to avoid getting caught. Does that make sense?

I'd also add that if the belief is that two or more guys attacked Jennifer, they probably all then ended up in her car that morning. And are you really going to tell me that these guys were so thorough that they managed to wipe away ALL fingerprints except a partial? Keep in mind, given that the car was put in that other parking space at noon that day, it would've only given them a small amount of time to: attack Jennifer, get her into the car, take her somewhere, wrestle her out of the car, take all of her stuff--except the player--out of the car, presumably rape Jennifer and kill her, dispose of her body, wipe the entire car down to remove all evidence, and park it in that space. Once again, it 's just a bit of a stretch to me.

What makes more sense to me, and I know what this means without being blatant about it, is Jennifer went out that night with the idea of staying over at somebody else's house. She took her work stuff with her. She took the next day's outfit with her. She gets to where she is going. Jennifer then takes her work stuff out of the car to go inside wherever she is staying over--not taking the DVD player because it's supposed to remain in the car for somebody else. There's a fight. She's murdered. The killer disposes of her stuff. Disposes of her. Gets somebody to dispose of her car or does it himself. Thus, there's only one set of fingerprints to wipe away . . . not many . . . thus it's an easier job.

And I'd add one more thing to this. The above scenario would also then fall into a situation where whoever parked the car tried to take it back to Jennifer's complex, trying to make it look like she was attacked on the way to work. The idea being that when the police showed up, they'd see the car, discover Jennifer was missing, and thus think somebody went to her condo and abducted her. Whereas, the truth would be she went out and was abducted somewhere else.

However, what got in the way was the family already being at the condo. That nixed the deceptive plan. Because I don't believe it's a coincidence that the family was at the condo just shortly before Jennifer's car was parked a mile down the street. I think those two things are related. The reason the car was parked right down the street was because the driver had the full intention of returning the car to Jennifer's condo--I'm almost sure of it.

You have to get in the killer's mind. He doesn't want the car to be parked in a place where it'll lead to him. He wants it parked in the EXACT OPPOSITE place. So, the only reason to return the car to the Jennifer's parking lot is draw attention away from the place where Jennifer's abduction happened. But, what got in the way of that was the family already being there. So, he or his henchman had to take the next best thing--down the street, because driving around in that car any longer might get them caught.

I hope this all made sense. Sorry it's long but some of it is hard to explain.
 
Below is information directly from the Kesse family:


(Upon reaching Jennifer’s condominium by mid afternoon, we found it normal. Everything was clean and in place. She had obviously slept in her bed, taken a shower (wet towel and shower) and had a couple outfits on the bed she was choosing to wear. Her tracks seem to cease from when she left her condo for work usually around 7:30-7:45am each work day.)

The car was parked at high noon while the family arrived mid afternoon. My belief is that she was abducted at her vehicle in the morning and taken into another vehicle. Just my theory unfortunately there is little to go on and lots of unanswered questions.
 
fasteddy8170 said:
What makes more sense to me, and I know what this means without being blatant about it, is Jennifer went out that night with the idea of staying over at somebody else's house. She took her work stuff with her. She took the next day's outfit with her. She gets to where she is going. Jennifer then takes her work stuff out of the car to go inside wherever she is staying over--not taking the DVD player because it's supposed to remain in the car for somebody else. There's a fight. She's murdered. The killer disposes of her stuff. Disposes of her. Gets somebody to dispose of her car or does it himself. Thus, there's only one set of fingerprints to wipe away . . . not many . . . thus it's an easier job.

And I'd add one more thing to this. The above scenario would also then fall into a situation where whoever parked the car tried to take it back to Jennifer's complex, trying to make it look like she was attacked on the way to work. The idea being that when the police showed up, they'd see the car, discover Jennifer was missing, and thus think somebody went to her condo and abducted her. Whereas, the truth would be she went out and was abducted somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Generally, I agree that this is probably the most theoretically plausible explanation for known evidence. And if she were dating guys other than her slightly long-distance boyfriend, it is plausible she would have kept that a secret to avoid others' judgement. The big question is how there is no known trail of correspondence between her and the guy - but maybe there is and it was overlooked and perceived to be meaningless.

However, in this scenario, I don't think the perp ever intended to return her vehicle to her complex. Rather, he is simply pointing LE to where he wants them to look for the perp. He left the car in front of an apartment complex in a crime ridden, low income area; this would be the metaphorical equivalent of 'blame it on a black guy' (and the perp is likely the opposite of that).

In this scenario, I suspect that the perp may live out of town, for the following reasons:

a.) He would probably have the opportunity to move her car pre-daylight, or he could have waited until the following night. Instead, (assuming he is the taped POI) he moved her car shortly after noon. That seems consistent with procrastinating, and improvising after being forced to check out of a hotel at noon.

b.) He didn't seem too concerned with anybody recognizing him in the area where he abandoned her car.

c.) He was seen walking in the direction of Jen's condo (I think). Dogs may or may not have tracked him back to her condo. Supposedly, it appeared that someone had taken a shower inside Jen's condo. If not Jen, who? Why? Maybe because he had nowhere else to go after checking out of his hotel room.

d.) An invite to stay at a nice hotel would have conceivably been more attractive than an invite to stay at a random residence.

e.) This perp, despite possibly being a known associate of Jen's, is more likely to be overlooked if he lives out of town.
 
It doesn't have to be several guys standing around to take Jennifer. It could have been one guy near to her as she opened her car door. He could have used a gun and told her to move over as he drove. It could happen very fast and no one even notice. As far as the DVD, maybe it was just over looked the they forgot to pick it up. Or maybe they didn't want it.
 
fasteddy8170 said:
I can see why a daylight abduction makes sense to some people. I realize they happen. But it's the overall picture of the case and its facts that I think reveal something other than Jennifer being seized as she went to work that Tuesday morning.

First, I have a hard time visualizing how this all went down. I know it seems obvious: A couple guys were hanging outside her condo. She exits. They attack her. Throw Jennifer and her stuff in her car and take off.

But there are a lot of details left out of that scenario that are a stretch for me. So, the guys were kind of just standing around in broad daylight waiting for her? Nobody saw them? Jennifer didn't see them when she left her condo? (Keep in mind: She'd expressed to others she was fearful of the men working in her complex. So, her awareness would've been heightened) Why would they take her car? Didn't they have their own? Did they throw her in the front seat or the back seat? Or, was she forced to drive somewhere at gun point? Why, in attacking her, would the guys make sure ALL of her work stuff got put in the car as well--weren't they pressed for time, fearing they'd get caught?

Furthermore, so . . . they get to wherever they're going. These guys take the time to take ALL of Jennifer's work stuff out of the car BUT they leave the DVD (CD?) player in the car? That just seems weird to me. I mean, of everything that was in that car including Jennifer's work stuff, the DVD player would've been the easiest thing to liquidate if the abductors wanted to make a couple bucks off the whole deal. To be clear: They took her phone. They took the phone Jennifer was supposed to return. They took her laptop . . . but didn't take the DVD player? In fact, the player was in the exact same place in the car where Jennifer put it days before that. So . . . in the entire attack, and the throwing of Jennifer into her car, the DVD player never got thrown to the floor? Never got thrown out of the car? Never got damaged? Despite multiple people being in the car . . . in both the front and back seat? Once again, seems strange.

See, it's the taking of the car, to me, that really puts the biggest hole in the daylight abduction theory. Once again, we all know of many kidnappings of women because we're into disappearances and unsolved crimes. And when I think about a woman disappearing, and her car being parked somewhere else hours or days later, it's usually a case of a woman being out somewhere . . . a bar, work, a boyfriend's house, Walmart, etc. . . . and being attacked, not at home. Not on her walk from her condo to her car. Why? Because taking a victim's car from her residence is THE EASIEST WAY to get caught. And the reason the car is moved somewhere else in the usual cases is to take attention away from the bar, the workplace, the boyfriend's house, the Walmart, etc. So, taking the car from a residence is a way to get caught; moving the car from anywhere else is a way to avoid getting caught. Does that make sense?

I'd also add that if the belief is that two or more guys attacked Jennifer, they probably all then ended up in her car that morning. And are you really going to tell me that these guys were so thorough that they managed to wipe away ALL fingerprints except a partial? Keep in mind, given that the car was put in that other parking space at noon that day, it would've only given them a small amount of time to: attack Jennifer, get her into the car, take her somewhere, wrestle her out of the car, take all of her stuff--except the player--out of the car, presumably rape Jennifer and kill her, dispose of her body, wipe the entire car down to remove all evidence, and park it in that space. Once again, it 's just a bit of a stretch to me.

What makes more sense to me, and I know what this means without being blatant about it, is Jennifer went out that night with the idea of staying over at somebody else's house. She took her work stuff with her. She took the next day's outfit with her. She gets to where she is going. Jennifer then takes her work stuff out of the car to go inside wherever she is staying over--not taking the DVD player because it's supposed to remain in the car for somebody else. There's a fight. She's murdered. The killer disposes of her stuff. Disposes of her. Gets somebody to dispose of her car or does it himself. Thus, there's only one set of fingerprints to wipe away . . . not many . . . thus it's an easier job.

And I'd add one more thing to this. The above scenario would also then fall into a situation where whoever parked the car tried to take it back to Jennifer's complex, trying to make it look like she was attacked on the way to work. The idea being that when the police showed up, they'd see the car, discover Jennifer was missing, and thus think somebody went to her condo and abducted her. Whereas, the truth would be she went out and was abducted somewhere else.

However, what got in the way was the family already being at the condo. That nixed the deceptive plan. Because I don't believe it's a coincidence that the family was at the condo just shortly before Jennifer's car was parked a mile down the street. I think those two things are related. The reason the car was parked right down the street was because the driver had the full intention of returning the car to Jennifer's condo--I'm almost sure of it.

You have to get in the killer's mind. He doesn't want the car to be parked in a place where it'll lead to him. He wants it parked in the EXACT OPPOSITE place. So, the only reason to return the car to the Jennifer's parking lot is draw attention away from the place where Jennifer's abduction happened. But, what got in the way of that was the family already being there. So, he or his henchman had to take the next best thing--down the street, because driving around in that car any longer might get them caught.

I hope this all made sense. Sorry it's long but some of it is hard to explain.
Click to expand...

Good questions. I don't remember what time Jennifer's parents arrived, but I thought her brother arrived sometime between noon and 1:00 PM. BUT the person with Jennifer's car may have known there were workers around the complex and didn't want to be seen.

What blows this away is the fact that Jennifer's bed appeared to be slept in. (Where was Jennifer when she made the call to her boy friend? In bed? On the couch in the den?) Could Jennifer have changed her mind about staying in her apartment and went to a friend's with the intention of staying the night? It doesn't have to be an affair with another guy. Something at work or in her life may have bothered her and she decided to go to another lady's place. Talk it over with her and ask if she could spend the night. Maybe she did it a spur of the moment thing. (Who would she have been that close to that she would discuss a private or work matter?) If the other party wasn't expecting her and something happened between her condo the other person's place there is no trail or evidence if she didn't call first. Then it could have happened in the parking lot - that night.
 
JnRyan said:
Good questions. I don't remember what time Jennifer's parents arrived, but I thought her brother arrived sometime between noon and 1:00 PM. BUT the person with Jennifer's car may have known there were workers around the complex and didn't want to be seen.

What blows this away is the fact that Jennifer's bed appeared to be slept in. (Where was Jennifer when she made the call to her boy friend? In bed? On the couch in the den?) Could Jennifer have changed her mind about staying in her apartment and went to a friend's with the intention of staying the night? It doesn't have to be an affair with another guy. Something at work or in her life may have bothered her and she decided to go to another lady's place. Talk it over with her and ask if she could spend the night. Maybe she did it a spur of the moment thing. (Who would she have been that close to that she would discuss a private or work matter?) If the other party wasn't expecting her and something happened between her condo the other person's place there is no trail or evidence if she didn't call first. Then it could have happened in the parking lot - that night.
Click to expand...

Quoting the Kesse family:

She had obviously slept in her bed, wet shower and wet towel. Outfits laid out for work.

Also car was parked at noon, family arrived by mid afternoon
 
Since there was so little evidence left in Jennifer's car it makes me think that she was perhaps transported in another vehicle....if this is true, then, two or more people were involved in her abduction....one to drive the vehicle that Jennifer was placed in and one to drive her car ....But, why take her car unless it was to make it appear that she had left for work that Tuesday morning buying her abductor(s) time to get the focus away from Mosaic???

Why drop her car off at the HOTG apartments? Was it because it was a short distance to the Mosaic? If she were taken in her car then the POI had to have some type of transportation at or near Mosaic... Unless he lived at the Mosaic or nearby.. Possibly even the HOTG...Could the POI have parked his car at or near the HOTG, walked to the Mosaic, abducted Jennifer and left the Mosaic in her car? Why drive it all if two vehicles were used in Jennifer's abduction? If she were abducted and placed into a van that some speculate happened, if two were involved, why not ride back to the Mosaic in the van ? There would be nothing unusual about a van coming into or leaving from the Mosaic....The car has always bothered me, why take the chance getting caught driving a missing woman's car unless the poi thought that they had more time than they actually did by making it appear that she left for work that morning...Another vehicle must be involved, either parked at the Mosaic or the HOTG?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 152 more.
Total: 2,496 (members: 153, guests: 2,343)

Online statistics

Members online
153
Guests online
2,343
Total visitors
2,496
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,899
Messages
18,131,581
Members
231,181
Latest member
Egladva
Back
Top