fasteddy8170
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
- Messages
- 341
- Reaction score
- 152
1911ss and JnRyan, according to several different locations, Jennifer's brother reached her condo at approximately noon that day. Around the same time, Jennifer's car was being parked a mile away. That's one heck of a coincidence. As for the bed being undone, that only means something if somebody knew the bed was made when she arrived back from her vacation. Without that info we don't know if she ever slept in her bed or not. For all we know it was unmade from before she went on vacation. If I never make my bed then there's no telling when or if I've ever slept in it. Likewise with the wet towel, as a FL resident, I can tell you due to the humidity of the air, towels will stay wet for easily 12 hours, especially if the towel has been used to dry off a person with a lot of hair, like Jennifer had. It if it were Vegas where I used to live with its dry air, that towel would be dry in an hour. But not in FL.
Theref23, I don't take any dog scent seriously. If dogs were all they were made out to be, every single missing person would be discovered. The fact is dogs get much more wrong than they ever get correct. I remember the case of that woman who kinda lost her mind and abandoned her car on the highway in MI or IL. The dogs picked up her scent and it looked like the woman got picked up by another car. However, in the end, they found her body in the lake beside the road. How did the dogs get that one wrong? So, given that, I completely dismiss anything in any case where a dog scent is involved.
colette, drive and hold a gun on somebody at the same time? I'm not saying it hasn't happened. But doesn't Jennifer jump out at the first stop sign? Even in the opposite scenario, she's driving and a gun has a gun on her, doesn't she drive into the nearest telephone pole?
marable, so, the kidnappers had a car AND they took Jennifer's car? Wow, this is getting complicated. I suppose it's possible. But once again, why take her car--it only is going to get you caught easier.
Two more things, first, I've listened to every single interview with the Kesse's over the last ten years. They don't seem to know any more about the case than we do. So, to use them as experts about all the details is like using any of us as experts. They THINK Jennifer slept in her condo that night. However, they don't KNOW it. In fact, nobody "knows" that--it's just a theory, because there's no proof. Wet towels and outfits on the bed are not proof. A cell phone ping from her phone at the condo location at 2am, for example, would be proof. However, there is NOT ONE ping from Jennifer's phone after her conversation at 10pm on that Monday. In fact, I could be convinced she shut her phone off after the conversation. Why? Was that a habit of hers when she went to bed? Did she always do that? Or, was there some other reason?
Secondly, the police from the beginning have looked at this as much as a night time abduction as a day time one--I think I put that quote up some time last week. Now, why would they say that? Obviously the wet towel and the outfits on the bed don't mean that much to them. So, is it okay when I say I'm a bit suspicious of the Kesse's motives when they say, "Jennifer OBVIOUSLY slept in her bed"? Because the police don't think it's "obvious".
However, I think what this all points out is how the Kesse's themselves have pointed the direction in a certain way--the day time abduction--by saying things are SO obvious. Thus, it gets everyone on here to think the same thing. But, when you look at it, what the family says is obvious, actually isn't. Really, all we have in this case are possibilities and theories. That the Kesse's act otherwise is strange to me.
Theref23, I don't take any dog scent seriously. If dogs were all they were made out to be, every single missing person would be discovered. The fact is dogs get much more wrong than they ever get correct. I remember the case of that woman who kinda lost her mind and abandoned her car on the highway in MI or IL. The dogs picked up her scent and it looked like the woman got picked up by another car. However, in the end, they found her body in the lake beside the road. How did the dogs get that one wrong? So, given that, I completely dismiss anything in any case where a dog scent is involved.
colette, drive and hold a gun on somebody at the same time? I'm not saying it hasn't happened. But doesn't Jennifer jump out at the first stop sign? Even in the opposite scenario, she's driving and a gun has a gun on her, doesn't she drive into the nearest telephone pole?
marable, so, the kidnappers had a car AND they took Jennifer's car? Wow, this is getting complicated. I suppose it's possible. But once again, why take her car--it only is going to get you caught easier.
Two more things, first, I've listened to every single interview with the Kesse's over the last ten years. They don't seem to know any more about the case than we do. So, to use them as experts about all the details is like using any of us as experts. They THINK Jennifer slept in her condo that night. However, they don't KNOW it. In fact, nobody "knows" that--it's just a theory, because there's no proof. Wet towels and outfits on the bed are not proof. A cell phone ping from her phone at the condo location at 2am, for example, would be proof. However, there is NOT ONE ping from Jennifer's phone after her conversation at 10pm on that Monday. In fact, I could be convinced she shut her phone off after the conversation. Why? Was that a habit of hers when she went to bed? Did she always do that? Or, was there some other reason?
Secondly, the police from the beginning have looked at this as much as a night time abduction as a day time one--I think I put that quote up some time last week. Now, why would they say that? Obviously the wet towel and the outfits on the bed don't mean that much to them. So, is it okay when I say I'm a bit suspicious of the Kesse's motives when they say, "Jennifer OBVIOUSLY slept in her bed"? Because the police don't think it's "obvious".
However, I think what this all points out is how the Kesse's themselves have pointed the direction in a certain way--the day time abduction--by saying things are SO obvious. Thus, it gets everyone on here to think the same thing. But, when you look at it, what the family says is obvious, actually isn't. Really, all we have in this case are possibilities and theories. That the Kesse's act otherwise is strange to me.
