FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #12

[JetsFan24]

I read that Mr. Kesse knew JK's boss. I think if she had somehow uncovered anything nefarious, she would have shared this with her father ? I think this crime was an unrequited love situation, but jmo.

For sure. I think Drew and his daughter were incredibly close to the point where this information would've been divulged. He even mentioned that Jennifer called him three times in four days whilst on vacation.

Any sort of work trouble surely would've been a topic of conversation (IMO) so I agree with you.

This is what makes it such a tough case to wrap my head around. The family and friends were on top of this right away. That again is why I point to a night time abduction and murder. The only thing that leads people to a morning time event is the damp towels and my understanding by reading through this thread is that the humidity in Florida would leave towels damp throughout the night. Especially if they (or one towel) were discarded on the floor in a ball.

Such a sad case. All of these cases are sad. But she was so well loved and the family figured out something was wrong in the matter of seemingly 3-5 hours (by 11AM yes?). Hopefully it gets solved one day so the family can find some peace.

 

[Markybug]

Could someone clarify a query re the work colleague?

Is it correct he scrapped his car (only 6 years old?) immediately or soon after jenn went missing?

 

[Markybug]

With all the rekindled interest in the case thanks to the Unconcluded Podcast , i wonder if the police will be watching the 2 possible poi ? Any changes in pattern, demeanour etc..

 

[kemo]

From the podcast on different internet sources, Joyce Kesse, Jen's mother has gone on record with information that while the condo was mostly impeccably clean and neat, the shower had condensation inside, Jen's pajamas were on the bathroom floor, a towel, still moist, hung on the dryer in the laundry room and her bed had been slept on, on one side while outfits (more than one) that were describe as "suitable for" that would go with the missing taupe pumps (type of woman's shoes) were draped over the other side of the bed.

All of that is pretty suggestive of someone getting up in the morning and going to work. The is what Joyce Kesse seems to think.

The alternative explanation would be that she had gone to bed the gotten a phone call (on her landline) enticing her go somewhere. Whatever the enticement, she apparently decided to wear work appropriate clothes and she probably took a shower, since her pajamas were on the bathroom floor and not her bedroom where here clothes were.

What possible pretense could have gotten her out after she had gone to bed?:

An emergency at the office? Would she have gotten "dressed" for that. I have no idea the "culture" of her work place but I can't imagine a late night emergence that would warrant carefully selecting an outfit to wear.

A friend having a crisis? She certainly wouldn't take shower and would wear whatever was quick and easy.

A surprise rendezvous with a secret lover? She might get showered and dressed up but would she even consider "suitable for work" outfits?

The possibility of a secret lover that would suggest a secret life, is always a possibility. I know of a situation of a well respected attorney who was murdered by an ex-con she had been having some kind of a down low relationship with that none of her family, friends or her attorney-boyfriend knew anything about. This kind of situation would create a real wild card for the investigation. You would expect evidence of something like this to turn up in her phone records or in her condo when it was searched or cleaned. It is always a possibility, however remote.

Occam's razor still supports the assumption that she left in the morning to go to work as if everything was normal. If it is well documented that her phone was shut off at 10:40 PM, this assumption might be undercut but it would still be very likely.

 

[rd_jfc]

From the podcast on different internet sources, Joyce Kesse, Jen's mother has gone on record with information that while the condo was mostly impeccably clean and neat, the shower had condensation inside, Jen's pajamas were on the bathroom floor, a towel, still moist, hung on the dryer in the laundry room and her bed had been slept on, on one side while outfits (more than one) that were describe as "suitable for" that would go with the missing taupe pumps (type of woman's shoes) were draped over the other side of the bed.

All of that is pretty suggestive of someone getting up in the morning and going to work. The is what Joyce Kesse seems to think.

The alternative explanation would be that she had gone to bed the gotten a phone call (on her landline) enticing her go somewhere. Whatever the enticement, she apparently decided to wear work appropriate clothes and she probably took a shower, since her pajamas were on the bathroom floor and not her bedroom where here clothes were.

What possible pretense could have gotten her out after she had gone to bed?:

An emergency at the office? Would she have gotten "dressed" for that. I have no idea the "culture" of her work place but I can't imagine a late night emergence that would warrant carefully selecting an outfit to wear.

A friend having a crisis? She certainly wouldn't take shower and would wear whatever was quick and easy.

A surprise rendezvous with a secret lover? She might get showered and dressed up but would she even consider "suitable for work" outfits?

The possibility of a secret lover that would suggest a secret life, is always a possibility. I know of a situation of a well respected attorney who was murdered by an ex-con she had been having some kind of a down low relationship with that none of her family, friends or her attorney-boyfriend knew anything about. This kind of situation would create a real wild card for the investigation. You would expect evidence of something like this to turn up in her phone records or in her condo when it was searched or cleaned. It is always a possibility, however remote.

Occam's razor still supports the assumption that she left in the morning to go to work as if everything was normal. If it is well documented that her phone was shut off at 10:40 PM, this assumption might be undercut but it would still be very likely.

I agree with the thoughts overall, but I would say there are three things that are mitigating factors but only info loved ones would know.

1) There are any number of reasons why Jennifer took a shower before 10pm previous evening, going back out being one of them. Laying out clothes for work next day may very well have not been a nightly practice but this evening was different. She had just carried her luggage from a long weekend trip and set them down as soon as she came in the door. It had not been unpacked. her usual routine may have been slightly different this evening. Slept on one side of the bed? I would say sounds more like she laid some possible clothes out for next day and relaxed on one side of the bed while talking on the telephone.

2) Although I don't know validity of it, it has been posted that Jennifer was known to keep her shoes in a briefcase out in the car and change shoes for driving, i.e. did not necessarily bring her shoes in each night. I further contend that these new shoes her family knew about from her description was bought for the trip, and she would have had them at work Monday. She didn't even open the luggage she brought in, I would say it is very likely she didn't bring her briefcase with shoes in if there is any truth that this was known to occur.

3) I pose this question regularly. Is there anything missing that is known would only be carried out to her car Tuesday morning to go to work? I cite the briefcase with her new shoes in it as definitely not a given she carried it out to her car Tuesday morning due her known practice. No one has ever suggested something that would only be missing if she had gone out to her car to go to work Tuesday morning. I admit there isn't much that could be identified as such, but by same token it makes going out to her car Monday evenin or Tuesday morning equally possible just based on that. The two phones being powered off at 10:40pm could only be overcome with some ironclad indication of Jennifer home Tuesday morning, and there is none.

 

[kemo]

rd__jfc,

Knowing whether it was an AM or PM abduction is critical to solving thus case. The phone records probably settle this issue and the police have that information and do not want to disclose it.

The bed was reported to have been "slept in" on one died, not "slept on"

 

[JetsFan24]

rd__jfc,

Knowing whether it was an AM or PM abduction is critical to solving thus case. The phone records probably settle this issue and the police have that information and do not want to disclose it.

The bed was reported to have been "slept in" on one died, not "slept on"

But that could also indicate that she had been in bed before being woken up to go to the door. Maybe a loud sound woke her up and she opened the door to investigate? Just a thought.

Also, has it been documented if she had any surrounding neighbors? I know the complex was relatively unoccupied. But I still find it hard to believe that she was the only person living there.

I ask this, because if she has any sort of neighbors, and it was a night time abduction, there surely had to have been some sort of commotion heard, unless she was immediately incapacitated.

Someone has to know something.

 

[JetsFan24]

From the podcast on different internet sources, Joyce Kesse, Jen's mother has gone on record with information that while the condo was mostly impeccably clean and neat, the shower had condensation inside, Jen's pajamas were on the bathroom floor, a towel, still moist, hung on the dryer in the laundry room and her bed had been slept on, on one side while outfits (more than one) that were describe as "suitable for" that would go with the missing taupe pumps (type of woman's shoes) were draped over the other side of the bed.

All of that is pretty suggestive of someone getting up in the morning and going to work. The is what Joyce Kesse seems to think.

The alternative explanation would be that she had gone to bed the gotten a phone call (on her landline) enticing her go somewhere. Whatever the enticement, she apparently decided to wear work appropriate clothes and she probably took a shower, since her pajamas were on the bathroom floor and not her bedroom where here clothes were.

What possible pretense could have gotten her out after she had gone to bed?:

An emergency at the office? Would she have gotten "dressed" for that. I have no idea the "culture" of her work place but I can't imagine a late night emergence that would warrant carefully selecting an outfit to wear.

A friend having a crisis? She certainly wouldn't take shower and would wear whatever was quick and easy.

A surprise rendezvous with a secret lover? She might get showered and dressed up but would she even consider "suitable for work" outfits?

The possibility of a secret lover that would suggest a secret life, is always a possibility. I know of a situation of a well respected attorney who was murdered by an ex-con she had been having some kind of a down low relationship with that none of her family, friends or her attorney-boyfriend knew anything about. This kind of situation would create a real wild card for the investigation. You would expect evidence of something like this to turn up in her phone records or in her condo when it was searched or cleaned. It is always a possibility, however remote.

Occam's razor still supports the assumption that she left in the morning to go to work as if everything was normal. If it is well documented that her phone was shut off at 10:40 PM, this assumption might be undercut but it would still be very likely.

I still don't see her not turning her cell phone on in the morning. Didn't she normally call her boyfriend on the way to the office? Also, wasn't it documented that she used her phone as an alarm clock?

 

[Truth Prevails]

I agree with the thoughts overall, but I would say there are three things that are mitigating factors but only info loved ones would know.

1) There are any number of reasons why Jennifer took a shower before 10pm previous evening, going back out being one of them. Laying out clothes for work next day may very well have not been a nightly practice but this evening was different. She had just carried her luggage from a long weekend trip and set them down as soon as she came in the door. It had not been unpacked. her usual routine may have been slightly different this evening. Slept on one side of the bed? I would say sounds more like she laid some possible clothes out for next day and relaxed on one side of the bed while talking on the telephone.

2) Although I don't know validity of it, it has been posted that Jennifer was known to keep her shoes in a briefcase out in the car and change shoes for driving, i.e. did not necessarily bring her shoes in each night. I further contend that these new shoes her family knew about from her description was bought for the trip, and she would have had them at work Monday. She didn't even open the luggage she brought in, I would say it is very likely she didn't bring her briefcase with shoes in if there is any truth that this was known to occur.

3) I pose this question regularly. Is there anything missing that is known would only be carried out to her car Tuesday morning to go to work? I cite the briefcase with her new shoes in it as definitely not a given she carried it out to her car Tuesday morning due her known practice. No one has ever suggested something that would only be missing if she had gone out to her car to go to work Tuesday morning. I admit there isn't much that could be identified as such, but by same token it makes going out to her car Monday evenin or Tuesday morning equally possible just based on that. The two phones being powered off at 10:40pm could only be overcome with some ironclad indication of Jennifer home Tuesday morning, and there is none.

BBM - I agree with all your points but the part I bolded particularly interests me. How many people could have known about the 2nd phone? I think even Jennifer, herself, only found out about it being left in her condo on her way home from work on the 23rd.

As Jen was an avid cell phone user in 2006, it seems unlikely to me that she would have placed her cell phone in the proximity of her brother's friend's cell phone--making it easy for the perpetrator to discover she had access to two cell phones, plus a land line. (If the perpetrator had gained access to Jennifer's condo.)

After speaking with the owner of the cell phone earlier in the evening, I can see how Jennifer may have tossed his cell phone in her purse so she wouldn't forget it in the morning. However, it's most likely that she had her own on her bedside table or in a similar prominent position. (I believe she spoke to her boyfriend using her land line and he said she was ready for bed at that point).

I guess the powering down event of both cell phones at nearly the identical time could indicate one of two things:

1. the perpetrator was one of very few people who knew about the 2nd cell phone, thus limiting the list of suspects considerably,

or

2. after speaking to her boyfriend on the evening of the 23rd, Jennifer did go out after adding her own cell phone to her purse--where she had earlier placed the cell phone she was to mail in the morning.

 

[liz b.]

But that could also indicate that she had been in bed before being woken up to go to the door. Maybe a loud sound woke her up and she opened the door to investigate? Just a thought.

Also, has it been documented if she had any surrounding neighbors? I know the complex was relatively unoccupied. But I still find it hard to believe that she was the only person living there.

I ask this, because if she has any sort of neighbors, and it was a night time abduction, there surely had to have been some sort of commotion heard, unless she was immediately incapacitated.

Someone has to know something.

She was certainly not the only person living there at that time. If an old friend had come to her door needing,say, a ride home, there wouldn't have been any commotion at all ? jmo

 

[htiff]

In the most recent interview with Jennifer's mother, JK's mother makes it clear that LE has never told the family EXACTLY when JK' s phone stopped pinging. JK's mother even expresses some frustration about this.

Building a theory around when JK's phone did or did not ping last, may not be helpful.

LE may have kept this information as hold back for when they are able to finally zero in on a viable suspect.

 

[rd_jfc]

rd__jfc,

Knowing whether it was an AM or PM abduction is critical to solving thus case. The phone records probably settle this issue and the police have that information and do not want to disclose it.

The bed was reported to have been "slept in" on one died, not "slept on"

Thanks for this point. Although it sounds like I meant she didn't pull covers down when i said "slept on one side of the bed", that is how I have always heard referred to. Slept on one side, slept on right side, slept on left side, etc. I am not familiar with the phrase "slept in one side of the bed" but then again there is a lot of phrasing I'm not familiar with as time goes on.

In any event, I meant slept on one side of the bed as pulling covers down, getting in bed, and pulling covers back up. I also put a question on it. The way what I was responding to was phrased, clothes were laid on he bed and Jennifer slept on the other side. Maybe I misread it, but it was like yeah Jennifer slept on one side of the bed because she had laid clothes out on the other side.

My basic contention is that there isn't a good indication that she actually slept in bed. (There, that's where in bed phrasing comes in. For some reason when side is involved it becomes on one side. I don't know, I'm getting old.)

I'm not familiar with what exactly transpired but I understand from posts that her mom straightened up the bed and the condo overall and I understand the bed wasn't made on one side, however, I think it more reflects evening activity than sleeping all night.

In any event she didn't have her alarm clock on so it's hard to imagine why that doesn't have more impact on other's thoughts, outside of this forum where it has had an impact.

 

[rd_jfc]

BBM - I agree with all your points but the part I bolded particularly interests me. How many people could have known about the 2nd phone? I think even Jennifer, herself, only found out about it being left in her condo on her way home from work on the 23rd.

As Jen was an avid cell phone user in 2006, it seems unlikely to me that she would have placed her cell phone in the proximity of her brother's friend's cell phone--making it easy for the perpetrator to discover she had access to two cell phones, plus a land line. (If the perpetrator had gained access to Jennifer's condo.)

After speaking with the owner of the cell phone earlier in the evening, I can see how Jennifer may have tossed his cell phone in her purse so she wouldn't forget it in the morning. However, it's most likely that she had her own on her bedside table or in a similar prominent position. (I believe she spoke to her boyfriend using her land line and he said she was ready for bed at that point).

I guess the powering down event of both cell phones at nearly the identical time could indicate one of two things:

1. the perpetrator was one of very few people who knew about the 2nd cell phone, thus limiting the list of suspects considerably,

or

2. after speaking to her boyfriend on the evening of the 23rd, Jennifer did go out after adding her own cell phone to her purse--where she had earlier placed the cell phone she was to mail in the morning.

I agree with this completely, Truth. And it's very revealing in its conclusion. There isn't a reasonable way around it.

The only way around it is that some think the 10:40pm info is fabricated and the information given to Mr. Kesse is not true. It appears that they are confirming the information was not given to them by law enforcement. On the other hand, all law enforcement would be able to do is pass on a carrier analysis like this (it is carrier data that only the carriers could have retrieved, if they were able to).

My instincts are they were given this info unofficially to have some idea what happened to Jennifer. The specific terminolgy used in this indicates someone looking at carrier data knowing sensitive information such as the ID nymbers of the two cell phones, which could be from different carriers. I don;t know if the type of cell phones and the carriers was ever made known.

 

[Myserty64]

I doubt LE told Mr Kesse what time the phones were powered off. LE will have held some information back for investigative reasons and they usually tell nobody this information. Not family, not anyone.

As far as I'm aware there is one source and one source only for the 10:40 pm shutdown. It is very possible this is where the 10:40 pm shut down info for Mr Kesse came from.

We really need to know if in fact the phones were powered down or did they simply run out of 'juice.'

The year 2006 seems an age ago. How long did a phone battery hold a charge back then?

 

[Markybug]

I doubt LE told Mr Kesse what time the phones were powered off. LE will have held some information back for investigative reasons and they usually tell nobody this information. Not family, not anyone.

As far as I'm aware there is one source and one source only for the 10:40 pm shutdown. It is very possible this is where the 10:40 pm shut down info for Mr Kesse came from.

We really need to know if in fact the phones were powered down or did they simply run out of 'juice.'

The year 2006 seems an age ago. How long did a phone battery hold a charge back then?

I thought one phone simply ran out of power , and jenns is the unknown?

Mark.

 

[rd_jfc]

Yes, I rolled through the guestbook and found it. Pages renumber with 1 being most recent it looks like so this link good for only a limited time (but it will be on a nearby page)

http://jenniferkesse.123guestbook.com/?page=27

3rd post down, 7:00pm 07-23-2014, replied on 7:23am 07-24-Point A https://player.fm/series/in-sight-1204172/040-jennifer-kesse Point B.

Understood about the cut and paste thing, but could you summarize the point here for us? thanks

 

[rd_jfc]

I doubt LE told Mr Kesse what time the phones were powered off. LE will have held some information back for investigative reasons and they usually tell nobody this information. Not family, not anyone.

As far as I'm aware there is one source and one source only for the 10:40 pm shutdown. It is very possible this is where the 10:40 pm shut down info for Mr Kesse came from.

We really need to know if in fact the phones were powered down or did they simply run out of 'juice.'

The year 2006 seems an age ago. How long did a phone battery hold a charge back then?

So you're implying that the 10:40pm info was given somewhere else or is known to have been said by someone else, and that it was known before Drew posted it in his Guestbook? That he must have got it from this person?

Also, Drew specifcally said (i.e. was told) that both cell phones were powered off at 10:40pm. That is much more significant than Jennifer's alone powered off at that time, although that would be significant on its own given she was not known to turn it off and used it for an alarm clock.

I would doubt that Drew is quoting some blogger who fed him happy talk, especially to answer one question when they didn't want to open up the doors to being bombarded with questions. Disclaimer - I'm a blogger too. We're all bloggers here. But like I say, I don't think Drew would quote one of us without some disclaimer.

 

[Myserty64]

Has LE ever announced the phones were powered off at 10:40 pm? If they have; great but I missed it.

In 2006 or even today is possible to know if a phone is powered down manually and/or has the battery removed?

If I threw a phone into a body of water such as a lake, river or pond does that phone shut down in a manner that is detectable?

These phones are a key to what happened in this abduction.

 

[rd_jfc]

Has LE ever announced the phones were powered off at 10:40 pm? If they have; great but I missed it.

In 2006 or even today is possible to know if a phone is powered down manually and/or has the battery removed?

If I threw a phone into a body of water such as a lake, river or pond does that phone shut down in a manner that is detectable?

These phones are a key to what happened in this abduction.

Absoluely agreed with your points and questions.

The one thing that is indisputable is that LE did not announce the phones were powered off or much of anything else. Have they made any announcement providing information since 2007 when they provided the POI video and provided no helpful info whatsoever?

The both cell phones powered off at 10:40pm info was provided by Mr. Kesse in Jennifer's Guestbook in a post in 2014. Mrs. Kesse as quoted here occasionaly said that LE did not tell them this info. As far as I know there is no official confirmation that carriers for the two cell phones were able to retrieve and provide ping data for either phone. Mr. Kesse's post is the only semi-official acknowledgement that carriers were able to retrieve the data that I'm aware of.

The nature of the beast is that LE only knows what carriers tell them. If data was retrieved there is an analysis, and the information could be given to the Kesses indirectly without LE involvement. No one would want to acknowledge that.

The battery removed I have searched and posted on and so have some others here. The general answer is no, phones are inactive when powered off. However... there's a world of gray and CIA conspiracy out there and search results are overwhelmed with it. There's a world out there that says the CIA can turn a phone on with a backdoor and track you without you knowing about it. Do I know or care about all this? No.

I have provided a couple of possible explanations for a carrier analysis to say this, in any event the presumably batteries removed just adds emphasis that the phones had no more communications after 10:40pm and that they were communicating up to 10:40pm. The information is from whoever provided this info to Drew, who respected the source enough to quote it, which ultimately comes from the carrier analysis of their data. Also quoted the can't be in two places at once comment with it. The post is still there.

Water resistant cell phones weren't common in 2006. Being thrown in water would short them out and be equivalent to removing the batteries, which was still common to be able to do in 2006. (The iPhone is what we're dancing around here re: some of the most dramatic changes since 2006 regarding battery removal and water resistant. I don't have an iPhone so not real familiar with it.)

 

[scadagirl28]

The only thing that LE has ever said is from Sergeant Ring when he said she went off the radar after 10 pm. This was in 2006.