MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Staying on topic...

So, like I said, I am new to this case. I appreciate your patience with me very much - some of you guys have really put a lot into this thread - and I value reading your insights.

Bouncing off of that: What are your thoughts regarding the release of the information, two days ago (approximately) - that her blood was found on the scene?

Is there anything to the timing of that information being released? Or was it just to keep the case in the news? Or?

Thanks for any replies.

About blood evidence:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/09/jessica-heeringa-blood-missing_n_3244953.html

about timing:
http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/more_details_about_van_suspect.html

Quote from Cheif Shaw "a drop of blood outside the station belonged to Heeringa normally would take up to three weeks to complete. In this case, it was done in a week and a half, he said."
 
About blood evidence:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/09/jessica-heeringa-blood-missing_n_3244953.html

about timing:
http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/more_details_about_van_suspect.html

Quote from Cheif Shaw "a drop of blood outside the station belonged to Heeringa normally would take up to three weeks to complete. In this case, it was done in a week and a half, he said."

Thanks jenstar - that was precisely what I was looking for...

Now I'm off to read all the mlive.com information I can on this case, so I can be better-informed :)

Thanks!
 
The blood indicates that Jessica was abducted by someone who used force to get her to comply. What else could it mean?
 
Staying on topic...

So, like I said, I am new to this case. I appreciate your patience with me very much - some of you guys have really put a lot into this thread - and I value reading your insights.

Bouncing off of that: What are your thoughts regarding the release of the information, two days ago (approximately) - that her blood was found on the scene?

Is there anything to the timing of that information being released? Or was it just to keep the case in the news? Or?

Thanks for any replies.

I think it lets the perp know they're still working all the angles. It's not all about the van and the sketch. Now we know she was injured and if she's as scrappy as her granddad says, he could be too.



As for the Chief, I'd imagine it's too late but I think house to house wouldn't be a bad idea and certainly in any home with an RSO.
 
Thanks jenstar - that was precisely what I was looking for...

Now I'm off to read all the mlive.com information I can on this case, so I can be better-informed :)

Thanks!

Imamaze, our awesome Moderator, has also setup a media link below this here chat forum, it includes maps made by sleuthers and timelines as well. It's a "non chat" "info only" that was put together for us. :) I've referred to it many a time. I hope it helps and another set of eyes never hurts. :)
 
I thought WS is a crime investigation board? How can we do that and be nice to everybody? Discussions can take place that aren't meant to outwardly accuse anybody. If we can't discuss the MSN people, the families, strangers, owners - what are we left with?

I don't get it, I really don't. I get that we're to be respectful of one another and, for the most part, we're good at that. I've read the way posters other places just hurl insults at one another all day long which is useless.

One of the wellknown rules here is, if you're going to insult someone, do it without attaching directly to their post. Especially when they're not the one who brought the topic up to begin with.

Disagreeing with someone's opinion is different than personally attacking by using words like beneath. Have you read the way victim supporters talk about the perp on some threads? What purpose does that serve? It's not sleuthing, it's just name calling and venting anger.

:eek:verreaction:

Normally discussing moderation is not allowed on the thread since it derails the thread away from in this case Jessica. I'm going to respond to it so everyone may have a better understanding of our rules here...

Rumor is not allowed, you can discuss what is in main stream media and law enforcement. If you speculate it has to be with what we know thru the media and law enforcement.

If there are no suspects or persons of interest then no, we can not discuss anyone as such.

Yes, you can discuss crime and be nice to each other, that should be a given. Disagreeing doesn't mean you are attacking. You are wrong about a rule saying you can attack as long as its not personal. Attacking is wrong no matter what.

We of course have our Rules forum that may help explain a little better as well.

If you have any other questions you can pm me or any Mod here.

Thank you

Ima
 
The store owner is not the abductor. He has been cleared by law enforcement. If you still need to discuss him not putting up cameras that's fine, but I don't see the need to go on and on about how horrible it is that he didn't have cameras or that Jessica worked alone. It is awful and I too am sure he feels pretty bad about it.

I really think its time to move on from this unless law enforcement says he is to blame which they haven't.

Ima

I'm curious (and let me repeat, I didn't start the conversation to begin with) but where did you read that the store owner has been cleared?

I searched for 'cleared' peeps and only two are mentioned by their specific identities, the fiance and an ex boyfriend (who we don't know who that is - could be the guy who visited the store at 10:15-10:30 for all we know). The other two mentioned are a regular customer and a fourth unidentified person. So, we can fill in the blanks on those last two but it's like picking A, B, or C and maybe D.

If I've missed a concrete statement on this subject, I'd like to know. Thanks.
 
I'm curious (and let me repeat, I didn't start the conversation to begin with) but where did you read that the store owner has been cleared?

I searched for 'cleared' peeps and only two are mentioned by their specific identities, the fiance and an ex boyfriend (who we don't know who that is - could be the guy who visited the store at 10:15-10:30 for all we know). The other two mentioned are a regular customer and a fourth unidentified person. So, we can fill in the blanks on those last two but it's like picking A, B, or C and maybe D.

If I've missed a concrete statement on this subject, I'd like to know. Thanks.

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/muskegon_county/missing-woman-case-officially-abduction

"Police said the Exxon owner and manager are not persons of interest." ~quoted from the article.
 
I'm curious (and let me repeat, I didn't start the conversation to begin with) but where did you read that the store owner has been cleared?

I searched for 'cleared' peeps and only two are mentioned by their specific identities, the fiance and an ex boyfriend (who we don't know who that is - could be the guy who visited the store at 10:15-10:30 for all we know). The other two mentioned are a regular customer and a fourth unidentified person. So, we can fill in the blanks on those last two but it's like picking A, B, or C and maybe D.

If I've missed a concrete statement on this subject, I'd like to know. Thanks.

I'll see if I can find the article on this Woe, I can't remember where I heard it now.
 
re: the color of the shirt, I've seen it brought up that it was orange/red but I don't know the source of that info.

Depending on the shade, could be Central Michigan or Ferris State garb. Maybe a place to start, was anyone in the area home from school? Just spitballing...
 
Did you find anything of interest in the hunting angle?

About two pages back I cross referenced two maps, One with DNR "free to the public" land used for hunting. And campgrounds in or around said area. The second map was locations of the Camp Grounds. Straight North right off HWY 131 There is national forest and, get this: TWO nearest campgrounds to said area. That's it. Two nearest the national forest. (unless there's some that are "Mom & Pop" and don't advertise on Google) I did nix the ones further north on 131 because its nowhere near the green or pink area. My gut tells me that the "Wolf Lake" location is as remote and isolated as it gets. And it borders the forest. Let me post the link:

http://s1299.photobucket.com/user/jenstar551/media/hunting_zpsfe0be78a.jpg.html

Please excuse how crude the map is; I had to go from Gimp to paint to get it to do what I wanted.
 
re: the color of the shirt, I've seen it brought up that it was orange/red but I don't know the source of that info.

Depending on the shade, could be Central Michigan or Ferris State garb. Maybe a place to start, was anyone in the area home from school? Just spitballing...

The link jenstar just posted actually has the color of the shirt and it states red or orange. I can't find anything that has any more details on the shirt. Others have also stated of course that it could be red wings or a tigers shirt. It could also just be a plain old red or orange shirt. Problem with this whole case no details to go on.

Originally Posted by jenstar
http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local...ally-abduction

"Police said the Exxon owner and manager are not persons of interest." ~quoted from the article.
 
The link jenstar just posted actually has the color of the shirt and it states red or orange. I can't find anything that has any more details on the shirt. Others have also stated of course that it could be red wings or a tigers shirt. It could also just be a plain old red or orange shirt. Problem with this whole case no details to go on.

IDK why.. but to me it just "fits" that he would TRY to be so clever to try and wear "hunter orange" considering the things he planned to do If you're going to take a hostage, have weapons and a van. He'd need something to tie her up/subdue her, a weapon (knife/gun). To avoid a mess..maybe even a tarp. Being that he didn't get "caught" with her in the van; an explanation of why he had those items before or after would fit with "going hunting Mom, Wife, Officer" KWIM? JMHO

I'm just looking at all angles at this point.
 
So, does anyone think it could be a guy who used "hunting" as a cover for the abduction? Or am I just chasing my tail here?

You know, I just don't know if hunting could be used as a cover, but anything is possible at this point because we just don't have enough info to go on, so we are really brainstorming, to put some of the pieces of the puzzle together, and some of the pieces might fit to another puzzle so to speak and not this puzzle, but I'm Puzzled! :) I was hoping that LE would kinda tell us a little more in detail, without losing the integrity of the case, ya know?
 
Just give me an angle..any angle and I'll pound it to death. I'm about in tears right now because O/T and sorry about this in advance But to those who don't know; They've found Danielle Jelinek's body today, and I'm scared to ever-living hades and back that this is going to be Jess's fate as well. We NEED something to go on. Something that makes sense. Ok. endrant..so sorry. </3
 
It closed at 11 on sat and sun and 1130 during the week. So whenever you are talking about this you have to specify the day:seeya::seeya::seeya:

I am sure this has been linked but this is the schedule listed on the store website. However, I read somewhere else that it closed Sun-Thur at 11:00 and Fri. & Sat. at 11:30.
Sorry if this only adds to the confusion.

http://www.exxonstations.com/home.php?storenum=737233cb87dfe0e7b5525a1b7ecc112c

Hours of Operation
Gasoline
Mon - Fri 5:00 AM - 11:30 PM
Sat 5:30 AM - 11:00 PM
Sun 7:00 AM - 11:00 PM
Convenience Store
Mon - Fri 5:00 AM - 11:30 PM
Sat 5:30 AM - 11:00 PM
Sun 7:00 AM - 11:00 PM

jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
164
Guests online
2,076
Total visitors
2,240

Forum statistics

Threads
601,832
Messages
18,130,395
Members
231,155
Latest member
Aqfina2000
Back
Top