Also, NOT including any statements by former MCPD officers, does anyone still see it possible that Jodi's abductor also killed Gerald Best?Thanks!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Also, NOT including any statements by former MCPD officers, does anyone still see it possible that Jodi's abductor also killed Gerald Best?Thanks!
This, I can only speculate on, but I assume that certain leads were easier to follow than others. It shouldn't be that way, but sadly their budgets aren't infinite.This is interesting. Read this link from 2015 and note the statement from MCPD that they never overlook any leads, including psychic leads: Case remains open 20 years after Jodi Huisentruit disappeared - Radio Iowa
And then read the 2016 story of a State representative's experience with real, non-psychic leads that are being ignored by MCPD. Kooiker: Disappearance of Huisentruit remains troubling
And then check this article out that posted this week. Mason City revises psychic ordinance with long history.
If the MCPD would have put as much energy into this case as they are doing undoing a silly psychic ordinance, this case would have been solved by now. And nothing will change until the Media becomes angered by the inaction and starts pressuring MCPD to come clean about how it's handled this case.
Actually I've not heard of that case. Any good articles you could recommend?Also, NOT including any statements by former MCPD officers, does anyone still see it possible that Jodi's abductor also killed Gerald Best?
Also, NOT including any statements by former MCPD officers, does anyone still see it possible that Jodi's abductor also killed Gerald Best?
This, I can only speculate on, but I assume that certain leads were easier to follow than others. It shouldn't be that way, but sadly their budgets aren't infinite.
Actually I've not heard of that case. Any good articles you could recommend?
This, I can only speculate on, but I assume that certain leads were easier to follow than others. It shouldn't be that way, but sadly their budgets aren't infinite.
Actually I've not heard of that case. Any good articles you could recommend?
Somehow I sent a previous blank reply. Wanted to say Google Gerald Best and several articles come up. Notice what his brother says may be in Gerald's apartment. That may be a clue which could coincide with the Huisentruit case. I wonder if Gerald Best ever met Jodi? Did he find out something about her abduction 4 years later as some articles suggest.? If so, how did he get his information?This, I can only speculate on, but I assume that certain leads were easier to follow than others. It shouldn't be that way, but sadly their budgets aren't infinite.
Actually I've not heard of that case. Any good articles you could recommend?
Cannot recall reading this..
Interview with Amy Kuns • Find Jodi Huisentruit
March 14, 2011
Q: Do you think drugs were involved in this case?
A: Jodi had been really up and down before her disappearance. She would fall asleep in edit bays…and later in the day be really perky. I wondered what was going on with her. I would not be surprised if drugs were involved.
Q: Did Jodi butt heads with anyone at the station? What was her working demeanor? Was she always polite, or frustrated, irritated, happy and patient?
A: I was Jodi’s assistant. She was very demanding. She would often snap at me. Then she would turn around and clap…stand up at her desk and proclaim…”I love life!” I could never figure her out.
I'm not sure on that. They weren't proven wrong of anything. I would list them as investigative officers. One of them has a new job working for Mason City. I'll look up his new title.Sorry, been quite busy for the previous few days. Here's the updated version, though still incomplete.
I really appreciate all of the feedback and thanks I have been getting, so thank you all!
Edit: One quick question - should I name the officers implicated by Maria Ohl or would that be considered a violation of their privacy?
Are they though? I don't think I'd do that anyway - why shouldn't they be potential suspects or at least Persons of Interest? Just because they are/were officers/DCIs it doesn't mean that should be automatically excluded as potential suspects. And a police cover-up has been long-suspected (with some saying that the Chief's Wife may have sent the letter in order to "re-light the fire" under the cold case).I would list them as investigative officers.
Nor have any other of the suspects I have listed.They weren't proven wrong of anything.
Good points.Are they though? I don't think I'd do that anyway - why shouldn't they be potential suspects or at least Persons of Interest? Just because they are/were officers/DCIs it doesn't mean that should be automatically excluded as potential suspects. And a police cover-up has been long-suspected (with some saying that the Chief's Wife may have sent the letter in order to "re-light the fire" under the cold case).
Nor have any other of the suspects I have listed.
As a side note, I'm wondering why she implicated them. Do you think she had something against them or that there could be some (or a lot) of truth behind it? I'm leaning towards the latter, since she apparently hasn't recanted despite losing her job, and seems to stand by it still. Also, I'm surprised they (apparently) haven't sued her at all (libel, or something)?
I might do a bit of research on them and see if that turns up anything first.
I wonder if officer Ohl had to sign a non disclosure agreement? I don't know if anyone has tried to interview her recently.Good points.
Could they get her to do this and yet still fire her? An NDA only holds as long as their is a "partnership" (since there is an incentive not to disclose), surely?I wonder if officer Ohl had to sign a non disclosure agreement? I don't know if anyone has tried to interview her recently.
Could they get her to do this and yet still fire her? An NDA only holds as long as their is a "partnership" (since there is an incentive not to disclose), surely?
Hmm, would an NDA suspicious (seems so to me) or can it be explained by the fact that they don't want her to be spreading false allegations? I expect it's both. Although if she did really have proof then an NDA probably wouldn't have stopped her - or could/would it prevent her information from being used in court?