I think he kidnapped her at her car, took her some place and did what he did. then used the car to get back to that area, so he could walk home. I am thinking home was that complex. Perhaps temporarily.
FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #12
- Thread starter Harmony 2
- Start date
- Status
I think he kidnapped her at her car, took her some place and did what he did. then used the car to get back to that area, so he could walk home. I am thinking home was that complex. Perhaps temporarily.
That car sat undisturbed in the parking lot at HOTG for 2 days ? No one went near it ? Wonder why ?
If this was a worker, it just seems so...ballsy ? Wouldn't he have been missed ? And how did he get JK out of the Mosaic area if he moved her not long after the abduction ? And wiped that car down ? Something a little...off here. jmo
If this was a worker, it just seems so...ballsy ? Wouldn't he have been missed ? And how did he get JK out of the Mosaic area if he moved her not long after the abduction ? And wiped that car down ? Something a little...off here. jmo
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
More than a little off. This worker bee also disposed of every bag and case in Jennifer's car as well as Jennifer to where nothng has been found to this day. And it's all nearby according to beliefs.
And all this believed to have been done by an undocumented painter.
Maybe the car was always nearby, but Jenn wasn't ?
Not that a workman couldn't have done it. But, for me, it all comes down to the landscapers saying that they didn't see JK going to her car that morning. And they arrived at 7:30 am . Every Tuesday they worked on the plantings/grass right by JK's parking area. The distance from her parking area to the condo stairwell is so, so short. I just feel that they would have heard something/seen something, if one of the other workers had grabbed her.
IDK...I lived in Latin America and organized kidnappings were fairly common. Both political and kidnappings for gain. In those cases, people would disappear in broad daylight from crowded markets and streets. In a matter of seconds. But IDK about a workman being able to do that ? jmo
True, but whoever was involved in what happened to Jennifer moved her car, or had someone do this, so there is a direct link, or close to, between Jennifer's car, and the person/s who harmed her. So if the car didn't travel far, neither did the killer--at least not as of noon that day.
there is no evidence of struggle outside the apt or near the car.
He coud have had a key , he enterd the apt with a key
with a gun/knife force jennifer out of the apt taking the phone and car keys with her .
The other missing things briefcase , shoes were in the car so they ended up misding as well.
he parked his car somewhere in the mosaic. If he worked in the office he could have parked his car there.
He coud have had a key , he enterd the apt with a key
with a gun/knife force jennifer out of the apt taking the phone and car keys with her .
The other missing things briefcase , shoes were in the car so they ended up misding as well.
he parked his car somewhere in the mosaic. If he worked in the office he could have parked his car there.
Question I have is : why take the phones at all ? Both phones were powered off, and the batteries removed,at the same time...but if something went down in the apartment, why not just leave the phones there ? here's a huge clue around those phones. Why won't LE reveal exactly when the phones were powered off ?
I don't believe the abductor took the phones intentionally, but rather Jennifer had them both on her when she was abducted and the abductor found out later. Of course, when would she likely have both phones and it would seem that would be when she was leaving the apartment that morning. Another argument for a morning abduction. (However, I could see an argument that Jennifer had his phone in her briefcase and she put the briefcase in her car the night before.) I'm leaning toward a morning abduction, but I'm keeping an open mind about one that night.
We've heard her briefcase and possibly her purse were never found. I can imagine that whoever did this hid a body first and then went about disposing the briefcase and purse and it was then they may discovered the phones. This is 2006 and I only just purchased my 2nd cell phone a year before and that 2nd phone had texting capability. I'm trying to think back and remember hearing about phone pings and their importance in LE investigations in 2006. I'm sure we did, but I'm thinking it wasn't as widely known as it is now. Would a laborer, especially one who might be an illegal alien, know about such technology in 2006? The elimination of the phones by turning them both off would lead me to believe this wasn't likely one of the workers.
I still find the fact that Jennifer had two phones on her and this doesn't help LE. I'm sure it is entirely possible that both phones pinged on the same cell tower. But didn't LE or Drew Kesse state something to the effect that Jennifer couldn't be in two places at the same time? Were the phones pinging off two cell towers? If that were so, wouldn't that make it easier to triangulate the position where both were turned off?
And while I'm thinking about cell phone technology...would tossing a phone in the water have the same effect as turning it off? IOW, the POI tosses both the purse (her cell phone?) and briefcase (2nd cell phone?) into a body of water and the water effectively shuts down both phones the same as if the battery were removed.
I think the official report on the two phones in Jennifer's possession, was that they were "powered-down" by 10pm on the 23rd. But this may simply mean they didn't ping. Doesn't mean that the battery was removed, or that they were turned-off. They could have been in airport mode.
The fact that Jennifer left her mace at home, might mean that the second phone took up space in her purse, so she had to make a choice not to take mace with her on that day...
It is interesting that the abductor/s would take the purse, but not any other valuables. Perhaps the purse was kept as a trophy of sorts. Or it was disposed of with Jennifer. There are swamps around Orlando.
According to my phone mavens, the answer is : back then tossing a phone(s) into water would shut them off. Now, some phones will still work for a while after they are submerged. JK's mother discussed the cell phone towers. Graphic, but perhaps JK was placed in the water at the same time as the phones. jmo
JK's family has stated that LE has never revealed when the phones were powered off, even they, the family, have not been told this. Also JK's atache case was missing too...
OK. there are so many confusing reports on this. LE may not know. All they can tell by phone pings, is when the phones cease to interact with a cell tower.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Jennifer_Kesse
By the way, can you provide a link regarding the Kesse family saying they couldn't get this info? I recently read and watched a bunch of the shows on this case, and I don't remember the family saying this, but again, I might have missed this point.
I'm not sure the phone pings matter, unless they indicate an area Kesse might have been taken to. So perhaps there is hold-back info being retained here.
Edited
retty sure it was the Podcast. JK's mother discussed it.Gracie, it was either the Unconcluded podcast or the Disappeared edition. I lean towards the podcast... it is a huge clue. jmo
I read that the phones were powered of after she talked with her boyfriend, about 22h 40, probably someone who knew JK visited her at night and powered off the mobiles phones, probably she did not have knowledge as to this fact, the person who abducted JK knew that she came back to the Mosaic after the holidays with her boyfriend.
Edited
Gracie, it was either the Unconcluded podcast or the Disappeared edition. I lean towards the podcast... it is a huge clue. jmo
The 'Unconcluded' podcast. 2nd episode, I believe.
Yes, thank you. Even after all this time the family has still not been told when the phones ceased to work, were powered off, were thrown into water etc.
Edited
Gracie, it was either the Unconcluded podcast or the Disappeared edition. I lean towards the podcast... it is a huge clue. jmo
My understanding of cell phones is that there is no way to know if a phone was "powered off" only that it is not making contact with a cell phone tower. So if a phone is not making contact, or "pinging" there are a number of options as to what has occurred.
1) the phone is turned off
2) the phone is in airplane mode
3) the phone's battery has either died or has been removed
4) the phone is out of reach of service and a tower
There is no way to conclusively know which of the above is true, unless you are in possession of the actual cellular phone. So what LE must mean is that after her 10 pm call with her boyfriend, Jennifer's phone doesn't ping. And it doesn't ping the next day.
2006, phone batteries were not great. It's very possible that Jennifer simply let her brother's friend's phone die, because there was no point in it being charged while it was being mailed. And she may have turned her phone off after fighting with her boyfriend, or forgot to charge it because she was tired and upset.
The only hold-back info I can imagine, is that perhaps Jennifer's phone did ping after 10 and the location of the tower it pinged off of is being withheld because it is thought that it might be important once a suspect is located. It is important that LE maintain control over some information. And even family members may not know all the details of the investigation, because what if it turns out that someone close to the family did this---for example?
I've read a lot about cell phone evidence, but one of the clearest explanations is given in the Grand Jury testimony on the Robert Pape/Cristin Smith case--the Pinyon Pines Murders.
If you go to page 284 on the pdf, or 271 as the transcript is numbered, FBI agent Kevin Boles gives testimony as to what is meant when LE states that a phone has been "powered down", and the Pinyon Pines case (the murders themselves) occurred in 2006.
(Kevin Boles has also testified on phone ping evidence in the Christopher Brandon Lee/ Erwin Corin case, and the McStay/Merritt case)
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1156255/pinyon-pines-grand-jury-transcript.pdf
If you go to page 284 on the pdf, or 271 as the transcript is numbered, FBI agent Kevin Boles gives testimony as to what is meant when LE states that a phone has been "powered down", and the Pinyon Pines case (the murders themselves) occurred in 2006.
(Kevin Boles has also testified on phone ping evidence in the Christopher Brandon Lee/ Erwin Corin case, and the McStay/Merritt case)
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/1156255/pinyon-pines-grand-jury-transcript.pdf
- Status