It Can't Happen Here - 2nd Edition - Answers In The Sand

[Sasquatch321]

What?

Oh my God, not this again.

 

[Cappuccino]

Oh my God, not this again.

Yes, this again. If you make posts on a public forum, expect other posters to ask you what you mean when you don't explain yourself properly.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Yes, this again. If you make posts on a public forum, expect other posters to ask you what you mean when you don't explain yourself properly.

What is the question?

 

[Cappuccino]

What is the question?

What are you talking about in post #139?

 

[Sasquatch321]

What are you talking about in post #139?

DR owned a cedar chest, he wants it back, so I demand that LE does that for him. I want to know why LE thinks they can still keep that.

 

[Cappuccino]

DR owned a cedar chest, he wants it back, so I demand that LE does that for him. I want to know why LE thinks they can still keep that.

They can keep it because the case is still open. And no, that doesn't mean it contains anything incriminating against DR.

 

[Sasquatch321]

They can keep it because the case is still open. And no, that doesn't mean it contains anything incriminating against DR.

Well if they can grab a conclusion on the blood on the chest it could either exonerate or I guess convict DR. We should try to get to that conclusion.

 

[Cappuccino]

Well if they can grab a conclusion on the blood on the chest it could either exonerate or I guess convict DR. We should try to get to that conclusion.

Can you post a link about this blood on the chest, please? And I don't mean that in a snarky, "I don't believe you" way, I just mean that I haven't read about that before, or if I did I've forgotten.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Can you post a link about this blood on the chest, please? And I don't mean that in a snarky, "I don't believe you" way, I just mean that I haven't read about that before, or if I did I've forgotten.

It's not readable, it's only in this interview of DR telling us himself

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1725104

This blood needs results and we have the technology now to do so. John walsh said so.

 

[Cappuccino]

It's not readable, it's only in this interview of DR telling us himself

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/play/1725104

This blood needs results and we have the technology now to do so. John walsh said so.

So no evidence that there is even blood on this chest then, just the police told DR that they saw something that looked like it might be blood residue and gave that as a reason for taking it for further examination. And that was six years ago, it it had been blood they'd know by now.

 

[1911ss]

He's fixated not rational

 

[ELOCsoul]

My opinion is that LE is keeping a lid on lack of evidence against DR because they have none, and there is nothing compelling them to show their hand. I believe they are very afraid of a lawsuit, but ironically, the longer they wait to clear DR, the more likely it is there will be a lawsuit. Just MO.

 

[Sasquatch321]

So no evidence that there is even blood on this chest then, just the police told DR that they saw something that looked like it might be blood residue and gave that as a reason for taking it for further examination. And that was six years ago, it it had been blood they'd know by now.

Thats what I'm saying, what is the result and what do we have to do to get that answer. A cadaver dog hit next to the chest.

 

[Cappuccino]

Thats what I'm saying, what is the result and what do we have to do to get that answer. A cadaver dog hit next to the chest.

The cadaver dog is as meaningless as the cop looking at the stain on an old chest and saying it looks like blood. These are the kind of straws people clutch at when they don't know where to look. They're a waste of time when DNA on Jared's clothes has been matched to a person with child *advertiser censored* in his possession and who owned a car at the time with tyres consistent with tracks found in the Rassier drive. Those things are real evidence, not straws or presumptive tests.

The mystery about who took Jacob is over. What remains is to find Jacob himself and bring him home.

Coincidentally, the Mary Boyle case is set to break wide open too in the next few weeks - some posters might remember me mentioning her before, she was the six year old who went missing in 1977 a few miles up the road from where I live. And as with Jacob, there's been a big red herring in the case while the real culprit was sitting in plain sight all along. It just goes to show, you can bury this kind of secret as deep as you like but eventually the truth will out.

 

[dexter75]

THIS.

DR was his own worst enemy. No matter what he said or didn't say. He was doomed from the start.
Should have had an attorney from the get go, IMO.

My opinion is that LE is keeping a lid on lack of evidence against DR because they have none, and there is nothing compelling them to show their hand. I believe they are very afraid of a lawsuit, but ironically, the longer they wait to clear DR, the more likely it is there will be a lawsuit. Just MO.

 

[human]

I would find it incredible that DR did not have the advice of an attorney all along. He may have chosen to do his own thing, but I would imagine he would brainstorm with someone. In a small town, people know attorneys as friends and neighbors. Easy to talk over something.

 

[1911ss]

I would find it incredible that DR did not have the advice of an attorney all along. He may have chosen to do his own thing, but I would imagine he would brainstorm with someone. In a small town, people know attorneys as friends and neighbors. Easy to talk over something.

Not incredible at all really he's an innocent man no reason in his mind to lawyer up. He cooperated with le the whole time a guilty person never does that.

 

[cGorg]

Somebody is Lying. Somebody is Lying by Omission. Somebody is Telling the Truth.

 

[shergal]

Heres my new theory

Heinrichs tires were consistent with the unknown tire tracks for 15 years until kevin came forward. LE was at a loss that heinrich never turned anything up for them. Once kevin comes forward the tire tracks that were consistent with kevins are now kevins. Now the arrow turns to DR. The dna finally comes back and proves who took jared, the police name him a poi in the wetterling case to buy time and cover all the bases in their investigation before turning back on DR with the final test results.

What?? You think DR took Jared? Or Jacob? I thought you were advocating for DR? I'm lost.

 

[Simplemama]

This is such a great catch. Sharp eyes, Shergal!

WHAT were they thinking by allowing Jared to sit in the car?! I suppose they needed his statement before they could gather evidence from the car. Ugh.

The problem here, IMO, is that a defense attorney would likely be able to get the fiber evidence tossed on the basis that Jared's presence in the back seat a few days before the samples were taken may have compromised the samples. The prosecution would have to prove that the pants he wore that day had never been in contact with the snow pants he wore on the day of his abduction.