MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 #6

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do you guys think about LE saying that multiple people may be involved? They said something about 3 different individuals whose stories don't add up and it is possible multiple people may have been involved. LE obviously knows way more than we do and it seems to me like they wouldn't say something like this if they didn't have a very good idea. It also brings me back to something the police chief said about somebody knowing something but might be afraid to come forward because of a possible charge or something of that nature. I was just thinking, what if it is a group of people, say 3, but one or more of the individuals involved did not take part in the actual abduction even though they were present. (Which in my mind IS taking part in it) anyway.. Maybe they think this individual is afraid to come forward because he can be charged for being present and saying nothing, or doing nothing to stop it. It just seems odd to me that they would say there might be multiple people involved if they weren't pretty sure at this point. If there wasn't multiple people involved then they are basically telling the perpetrator that they have no idea what is going on, unless that is what they want him to think because he is under surveillance or something. What do you all think?
 
I would not be surprised if there were more than one person involved. Afterall, she would not just willingly stay in the van. If there were more than one person involved, to me it would say that it was personal. And planned. And make me look at other scenarios than just the RSO angle...
But the witness only states she saw one person in the van... although if the windows are tinted, you may not be able to see in the back.
Does anyone else find it strange that someone would abduct someone, drive RIGHT past a car in the parking lot ( guitar store.. where the witness claimed to be..) and then look at them ( which they would have to be, if the witness could describe him that well) If it were me... I would have steered clear of the witness' vehicle, AND would have turned my head away... hopefully that just makes me smarter than the perp!
 
In my opinion the LE is out of tips and they don't have a clue who did this. Analyzing every word he says and trying to read in to it isn't going to uncover any hidden meaning. The Chief isn't a professional speaker planning every word he says. This trail is going cold. It will take another abduction to catch the perp. I hope I'm wrong on this.
 
cebee said:
I would not be surprised if there were more than one person involved. Afterall, she would not just willingly stay in the van. If there were more than one person involved, to me it would say that it was personal. And planned. And make me look at other scenarios than just the RSO angle...
But the witness only states she saw one person in the van... although if the windows are tinted, you may not be able to see in the back.

Does anyone else find it strange that someone would abduct someone, drive RIGHT past a car in the parking lot ( guitar store.. where the witness claimed to be..) and then look at them ( which they would have to be, if the witness could describe him that well)

If it were me... I would have steered clear of the witness' vehicle, AND would have turned my head away... hopefully that just makes me smarter than the perp!
Click to expand...

bbm Our "witness" is the key to this whole thing, imo. I don't believe her, never have from day one.
 
Hejlena said:
bbm Our "witness" is the key to this whole thing, imo. I don't believe her, never have from day one.
Click to expand...

I totally agree and have said the same thing since I heard her story!
I do not believe anything she has said.


I think this witness is ONE of the ppl they are looking at and that's JMO.

Why was she there?
 
http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/jessica_heeringa_remains_missi_1.html

"Jessica Heeringa investigation a month later: Police re-interviewing people."


"Today, May 28, the case is just as baffling as investigators are virtually starting over in some instances, re-interviewing people this week who were first questioned when Heeringa first went missing from the Exxon gas station on Sternberg Road."

“There isn’t anything new (with the case),” said Norton Shores Police Chief Dan Shaw, whose department is leading the investigation. “We are continuing with interviews and re-interviewing some people, some of the first people we talked to, just to make sure we didn’t miss anything.”
 
cebee said:
I would not be surprised if there were more than one person involved. Afterall, she would not just willingly stay in the van. If there were more than one person involved, to me it would say that it was personal. And planned. And make me look at other scenarios than just the RSO angle...
But the witness only states she saw one person in the van... although if the windows are tinted, you may not be able to see in the back.
Does anyone else find it strange that someone would abduct someone, drive RIGHT past a car in the parking lot ( guitar store.. where the witness claimed to be..) and then look at them ( which they would have to be, if the witness could describe him that well) If it were me... I would have steered clear of the witness' vehicle, AND would have turned my head away... hopefully that just makes me smarter than the perp!
Click to expand...

Unless the witness was in a car with tinted windows - then it might look empty to the perp, and he wouldn't knowingly have looked at anyone?

However, I think you are correct in that something doesn't add up. If I'm remembering correctly, the witness to the struggle between Jessica and her abductor didn't think to dial 911 right away, or even follow the car. Odd.
 
Treelights said:
http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/jessica_heeringa_remains_missi_1.html

"Jessica Heeringa investigation a month later: Police re-interviewing people."


"Today, May 28, the case is just as baffling as investigators are virtually starting over in some instances, re-interviewing people this week who were first questioned when Heeringa first went missing from the Exxon gas station on Sternberg Road."

“There isn’t anything new (with the case),” said Norton Shores Police Chief Dan Shaw, whose department is leading the investigation. “We are continuing with interviews and re-interviewing some people, some of the first people we talked to, just to make sure we didn’t miss anything.”
Click to expand...
This article sums up what I posted earlier this morning. Back to square one. Cold case on it's way.
 
Eileen730 said:
I totally agree and have said the same thing since I heard her story!
I do not believe anything she has said.

I think this witness is ONE of the ppl they are looking at and that's JMO.

Why was she there?
Click to expand...

From the get-go, the female witness' "story" has been more than a little hinky. Presumably, her husband who was with her is a second witness. Isn't there also one other witness? Maybe none of the witnesses can keep their stories straight, and when they're interviewed, they are altering details and veering off course from their original statements. :moo:

I hope LE is still on the right track and that there will eventually be an arrest in the case and that Jessica's whereabouts will be revealed.
 
trenchmouth said:
This article sums up what I posted earlier this morning. Back to square one. Cold case on it's way.
Click to expand...

What I have found when I have been reading articles about Jessica Heeringa, is that when Chief Dan Shaw talks about the case, it sounds like there's nothing new to add to the discussion, but he did state on the Mlive chat that he is not privy to all the news, so that he inadvertently doesn't say something to compromise the integrity of the case.
When I have read articles from Detective Mike Kasher he talked about 3 men's names that continue to resurface throughout the investigation, so reading those articles sounds promising, compared to say perhaps reading those particular articles that Dan Shaw talks about the case.

http://www.freep.com/article/201305...issing-abduction-norton-shores-police-minivan


"A fellow Exxon Mobil employee was driving past when she saw a minivan drive behind the station, Kasher said. The woman turned around, drove past the station again and saw a man — who has been described as being about 30 to 40 years old — getting into the van, Kasher said."

"He said the names of three men, who have been considered persons of interest, continue to surface through the course of the investigation. Kasher said the men are customers and acquaintances of Heeringa and some of the information they provided to police didn’t add up."
 
Thinking of Jessica this morning. One month is just too long :(
 
Woe.be.gone said:
http://www.freep.com/article/201305...issing-abduction-norton-shores-police-minivan

.....Upon reading that remark, I thought about the 911 caller as he referred to "we" when he gave his account of finding the gas station empty the Friday night Jessica disappeared. I can't help but wonder who "we" consists of. It could be CH, the 911 caller, and one or two other people. We don't know. It's a little odd imo that we've only heard from CH when there was at least one other person who found the gas station empty. That means LE spoke to the 911 caller and, of course, they spoke to the other/s too. Did they tell the same story? It sounds as if they'd be in the same vehicle though. Unless they drove, after work, to the same gas station in separate vehicles and were somehow in on this together.
Click to expand...

Do I recall somewhere the caller said the pump was off and he came inside to pay and no one was there?
 
I was alerted about this case from another thread in WS and still catching up on reading the threads in Jessica's case.

The circumstances surrounding Jessica's disappearance reminds me of another case years ago that happened under similar circumstances.

On August 8, 1977, Yvonne Reglar, a 17 year old from the Cleveland, Ohio suburb of Fairview Park, was working alone at her job pumping gas at a Sunoco service station. The service station did not have any CCTV cameras back then and there were no witnesses to her disappearance. Yvonne has not been found and to this day is still missing.

Yvonne has a thread on WebSleuths:


OH OH - Yvonne Regler, 17, Fairview Park, 8 Aug 1977 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


http://doenetwork.org/cases/2475dfoh.html


http://www.charleyproject.org/cases/r/reglar_yvonne.html


I just wonder how many other cases there are from over the years that involve a female employee working alone at a gas station or convenience store with gas pumps that did not have any CCTV cameras on the business premise.
 
reedus23 said:
Well, what are the chances that they already interviewed the perp? If so, maybe this round will shake something loose.
Click to expand...

I believe that LE has already spoken with the offender. Just not sure it was in an interrogatory capacity.
 
BetteDavisEyes said:
From the get-go, the female witness' "story" has been more than a little hinky. Presumably, her husband who was with her is a second witness. Isn't there also one other witness? Maybe none of the witnesses can keep their stories straight, and when they're interviewed, they are altering details and veering off course from their original statements. :moo:

I hope LE is still on the right track and that there will eventually be an arrest in the case and that Jessica's whereabouts will be revealed.
Click to expand...



I have not read the "witness" statement but after reading the initial story I do remember thinking "How odd, you think something strange is going on and you pull into a parking lot and watch it?" Why not call 911 and say "I think something strange is going on?" I don't know, there might be more to the story than I realize. :twocents:
 
is it possible or likely that Rosaline Lee was another victim of Jessica's abductor?
has anyone in her life or her circumstances indicated a reason this might have happened to her, or is it totally random? someone who knew her, if they did this, would try to hide it better, wouldn't they?
If it is the same perp, why was one woman found immediately? could JH be alive if RRL is not if it is the same perp?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 86 more.
Total: 1,684 (members: 87, guests: 1,597)

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
1,597
Total visitors
1,684
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,713
Messages
18,209,312
Members
233,943
Latest member
FindIreneFlemingWAState
Back
Top