FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #12
- Thread starter Harmony 2
- Start date
- Status
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
I have asked for confirmation of Jennifer's package mailing situation at her employer for eleven years now and no answer. There are those close to the case who are sure that she would send the package from work.
But when I ask is it known that Jennifer availed herself of sending packages from work before no answer. Or even is it known that employees at her company routinely sent packages from work. I have worked in companies large and small all over the country and have never heard of employees use the mailroom to send packages. At most you could buy stamps at some of them, and of course could put self stamped mail in outgoing.
The concepts of "put some money in Miscellaneous" and "it's fine" are alien to any corporate culture I ever worked in.
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
what's interesting here, and what liz I think is getting at, and also has been asked in recent posts, is that the info that landscapers didn't see Jennifer that morning has been posted but no one sure about whether landscapers did or did not see her car as you mentioned. That's certainly very helpful if in fact that was said by landscapers.
scadagirl28
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2016
- Messages
- 229
- Reaction score
- 331
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/01/27/grace.coldcase.kesse/index.html?_s=PM:CRIME Liz if you pass all the nonsense the prisoner put the family through, you will find Drew 's comments on the landscapers.
The way FedEx and other shipping companies work is that you must have an account with them. You attach a label with your account number along with address to be delivered to. You can then drop it off in one of their boxes that are generally located in Commercial neighborhoods or you can have them pick it up in the course of some drivers route. Companies that do a lot of shipping might have one ore more regular pick ups.
The USPS (the post office) has similar service and is easier for someone who only does personal shipping. If Jennifer did not have her own account she would probably use the USPS unless she intended to use her employer's acct. She would not have been the first employee to ship a small package at her employer's expense.
The USPS (the post office) has similar service and is easier for someone who only does personal shipping. If Jennifer did not have her own account she would probably use the USPS unless she intended to use her employer's acct. She would not have been the first employee to ship a small package at her employer's expense.
Yes...I wondered about the fact that the distance between her condo and her parking space was so short...I think the landscapers would have seen or heard something if she had been abducted in those areas.
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
That's interesting. I have worked at three F500's for about 20 years. How is it you go into the shipping department and say I want to send this personal package UPS, can you take care of it for me? Never heard of such a thing, and you say you've worked at several companies that do that. Well, you're not alone, others have said they've seen it, but I don't even know how that would work. Do they package it for you, weigh it, scale it based on destination, and tell you how much it costs? In other words, same thing a UPS or FedEx counter person does? Is this a secret handshake thing? I mean, how does this exist and no one has ever talkd about it before until Jennifer is said to send a package from work?
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
Oh, I see here an answer to what I was just asking. So employees just say ship it and no one knows it's personal? Well, I can see why I never heard of it before.
Your comment is good info. I wrote on this in 2006. Police were quoted in news as saying they think Jennifer was out dropping a package off to send the phone. As if she had a personal FedEx account and packing in her condo and packaged up this phone and went to drop it off in a FedEx pickup box. Give me a freaking break. That was just the first of many idiotic Orlando Police statements on this case.
The whole point was that the friend requested it be shipped overnight to him, he needed it. That would allegedly be thr reason for going out at night, except that a package doesn't get shipped overnight any faster dropping it off in a box at 10pm than in the morning. So just utter stupidity on many levels, which they never managed to surpass at any point in this case.
Now if they had said we think she was looking for a 24 hour FedEx location or possibly (although would go against express wishes of friend) attempting to handle with 24 hour Post Office facilities then that's something to consider. That's what I focused on in beginning until this "Jennifer will send the package from work" thing which I have never seen one iota of information about.
And yet Jennifer dealing with the phone after that overnight it request is completely dismissed based on no information whatsoever. As in, yes, Jennifer sent packages from work or even yes employees at her company used the mailroom to send personal packages.
Nothing. Nada.
Harmony 2
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,875
- Reaction score
- 22,189
mod note: Please read the following and post accordingly.
1) When claiming something as a fact, you must prove it. Be able to provide links to information from approved third party sources such as mainstream media (MSM), law enforcement (LE), and admin-verified case insiders. If you state I read it somewhere you need to be prepared to provide a link.
2) The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.
3) We do not post the name of a private individual or sleuth individuals who have not been named by LE as suspects/POI's. We don't allow discussing anyone as a suspect or person of interest unless they have been named by law enforcement. In Jennifers case the individual in the Huntington on the Green video capture is the only person named as a poi by LE.
4) Posting information from blogs and other forums is not allowed.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?65798-Etiquette-amp-Information
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
1) When claiming something as a fact, you must prove it. Be able to provide links to information from approved third party sources such as mainstream media (MSM), law enforcement (LE), and admin-verified case insiders. If you state I read it somewhere you need to be prepared to provide a link.
2) The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.
3) We do not post the name of a private individual or sleuth individuals who have not been named by LE as suspects/POI's. We don't allow discussing anyone as a suspect or person of interest unless they have been named by law enforcement. In Jennifers case the individual in the Huntington on the Green video capture is the only person named as a poi by LE.
4) Posting information from blogs and other forums is not allowed.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?65798-Etiquette-amp-Information
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
bessie
Verified Insider
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 31,771
- Reaction score
- 1,707
I've never worked for any F500's but I've worked for 2 very large national organizations, one of which was one of the Big 4 CPA firms (with all the mergers, I believe it is "Big 4" now) and I've seen employees just ship something at the organization's expense OR employee is allowed to ship but reimburse the organization. The last one really isn't a bad perk as you can just walk to the mail room and not have to leave the building or do it on the way home.
This is interesting. I remember reading or hearing an interview where Drew Kesse stated the workers did not see her that morning. (I thought I read somewhere else where he said the workers stated her car was already gone when they got there that morning, but I'll have to hunt for that one.) This is also the first time in all the articles I've read where they state LE did not find any forensic evidence such as blood from Jennifer in the car. I can't believe the abductor would have cleaned her car that thoroughly! If the car was not used to transport a body, then if Jennifer were murdered (and I believe she was) that happened outside the car - i.e., find her body and the crime scene would have been nearby or right there.
I'd like to find where Drew Kesse states the workers didn't see her car either - if he, in fact, said that. (I may be mistaken on that point.) But if the car were still there that morning at 0730-0745, then was another vehicle used? WHY go back and get her car if that is the case? To provide a red herring for LE? That would be really risky, but maybe this is just one bold and confident individual. Or individuals.
Interesting article. That is kind of the 64,000 dollar question--when exactly did her car get moved from Mosaic? And if it was moved from Jennifer's parking spot earlier than noonish, where was it all that time?
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
The problem is that it's pretty hard for nearby workers to be sure enough to say we didn't see the car, it wasn't there. Which is entirely different from saying we are sure we didn't see Jennifer come outside to her car as usual.
Lots of comvulated thinking can be done to theorize on why someone would come back and move her car but in reality there's no reason to think her car was there that morning. A damp shower is all anyone has.
We know someone that Drew considered knowledgeable told him that both phones were powered down at 10:40pm. Until there's some information provided that says one or more phones were still active after 10:40pm, and given lack of crime scene at Jennifer's condo, there should be no expectations that she and her car was at her condo after 10:40pm.
Lots of comvulated thinking can be done to theorize on why someone would come back and move her car but in reality there's no reason to think her car was there that morning. A damp shower is all anyone has.
We know someone that Drew considered knowledgeable told him that both phones were powered down at 10:40pm. Until there's some information provided that says one or more phones were still active after 10:40pm, and given lack of crime scene at Jennifer's condo, there should be no expectations that she and her car was at her condo after 10:40pm.
I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion that the phones are a key piece of evidence at this point, this given what was stated by Jennifer's mother in Unconcluded about those last calls. Apparently the family hasn't been told when exactly the phones powered down. Only that there were no more calls made or received after the 10 pm calls.
But regardless of when Jennifer's car leaves her spot at the Mosaic, it never went far. And the POI, if the scent dog got it right, returns to the Mosaic.
This disappearance literally orbits the Mosaic condo complex.
Either the car is first taken to some place close by (at night or the next morning), and then moved the next day to HOTG, or Jennifer's vehicle is only moved from it's spot so it can be parked at HOTG.
But it never went far...
So why is the car moved at all? There had to be another vehicle involved at some point, as there is no indication that a deceased Jennifer was in that vehicle. Or a tied up Jennifer. Or a combative Jennifer.
And if she is deceased, the chances are good she is in a swamp--given the complete lack of discovery of any of her belongings or person.
Why take her car at all, if you have another vehicle you can use?
rd_jfc
Well-Known Member
Gracie, the excerpted comment above highlights a basic conflict of information. The father was in fact told that the phones were powered down at 10:40pm because he posted that information in the Jennifer Kesse Guestbook. He also said he wasn't opening the door to answering other questions but he did answer that one. So there is no question that the family was told the phones were powered down by someone Mr. Kesse respected enough to quote. That was I think in the 2013-2014 time frame.
Then I start seeing this information about Mrs. Kesse saying that the family wasn't told about the phones being powered down by law enforcement. Except it keeps getting shorted down to the family wasn't told at all. How did not being told by law enforcement end up not being told at all?
Now if she actually said family wasn't told at all, then the first posts I saw on this assumed law enforcement and mentioned law enforcement where the statement doesn't. So someone is either adding law enforcement in to this or removing it. But it can't be both.
In addition, given that Mr. Kesse most certainly was told the phones were powered down, I am assuming that he wasn't told by law enforcement and I think that's a safe assumption, either that or he doesn't want to say law enforcement was giving him information which is also fine.
But they were told some very specific information about the phones being manually powered off at 10:40pm and presumably batteries removed. Also something about Jennifer couldn't be in two places at once and talked about inexact ping science of 2006. So he was told a great deal and based on Mrs. Kesse's statement apparently not by law enforcement.
Now if someone can clarify any of this we would all be grateful, but it certainly isn't going to make sense to take law enforcement out of Mrs. Kesse's statement and then basically say that trumps Mr. Kesse's posts as far as I can tell.
I appreciate any and all clarifications because a lot hinges on this.
I tend to find that the more recent the report, the more accurate. Sometimes it isn't the interviewee that gets things wrong, but the person interviewing who makes an error.
Maybe we should pull up the Drew interviews on this and compare them with UnConcluded...Do you have links?
I looked on the Find Jennifer Page and I don't see anything about when the phones being powered down:
http://jenniferkesse.com/
Is this the page you are referring to?
Question: if you believe that Jennifer was abducted at night, as opposed to morning, what is your reasoning around when the car was moved, why it was moved, and why it never traveled or got very far?
Drew has made numerous statements regarding the phones powered down and the batteries presumably removed at 10:40 pm on JenniferKesse Guestbook.....Also, he has stated the same on various interviews that he has done....I don't know why Joyce says they were not told about the phones and Drew is saying something different ....Don't have a clue which version is correct ....
- Status