MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #12

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually the witness said that it sounded like the abductor had a cold IIRC at the time. And please explain to me how a voice that can be disguised easily means that whether they smoked or not is relevant.

Trevor said on the 911 call that it sounded like the guy had a cold. In the Fox9 interview posted yesterday, Aaron describes it as a smoker voice.

I think smoker voices are unique. They have a unique tone to them due to the inflammation and damage, as referenced above by Sasquatch. I don't share the opinion that someone can disguise their voice as dramatically as this (go from a feminine 'metro sexual' male to a low raspy smoker voice) consistently, without crackling or breaking form for 2+ minutes and be commanding, flash a gun, turn boys over in the grass, give instructions, etc.

Could a male with an already existing deep voice strengthen that sound by being commanding and talking loudly? Of course. But could a feminine band teacher do that? Idk.
 
That's true, why not take all 3 boys...but that could be said for any scenario really (independent perv or a 'professional' perv). Maybe 2 or 3 boys would be too hard to control and one or more could get away. But asking ages, looking at faces, and the sexual incident that occurred....This guy meant business, that's for sure. He knew exactly what he was looking for and he definitely had a specific type in mind.

BBM

What does this mean?
 
Trevor said on the 911 call at age 11 that it sounded like the guy had a cold. In the Fox9 interview posted yesterday, Aaron describes it as a smoker voice.

If a person has a smoker's voice does it mean they smoke? <modsnip> the perp clearly made every attempt to cover up his entire body except maybe his hands?

Doesn't it follow that he would also disguise his voice?

<modsnip> everyone who has a raspy (smoker's) voice smokes? If that is an irrefutable fact, then looking for a smoker makes sense.
 
There was no inappropriate act! Where is this coming from?

DR has a nasal sound in his voice not feminine or "metro sexual."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The "inappropriate act" may have come from another site. I read something somewhere else, but it did not come from any news outlet or MSM, so I think we can only consider this a rumor...unless, someone can provide a link to a credible source???
 
The "inappropriate act" may have come from another site. I read something somewhere else, but it did not come from any news outlet or MSM, so I think we can only consider this a rumor...unless, someone can provide a link to a credible source???

Agreed. It's been mentioned here on WS a couple of times. However, I do not have a source or the post number. I have removed the references to this in my posts as I would never want to feed the fire of a rumor if it turned out to be false.
 
Agreed. It's been mentioned here on WS a couple of times. However, I do not have a source or the post number. Take Patty's word for it - this was a sexually motivated crime.

This was a rumor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
This is a good picture...and this is why I'm confused. DR told Joy that when he looked out his bedroom window (after hearing the dog barking/after he was asleep), he saw flashlights by the woodpile. But this picture puts his bedroom on the opposite side of the house, away from the woodpile.

This inconsistency caught my attention too!
 
weterling%20gal101914%2087.jpg

Any car that pulls into this driveway between 915 and 945 is going to reveal itself at some point on the driveway. Whether it be one, two, three, four vehicles in that time.
 
Time for a ten minute stretch. Thread's closed
 
Thread is open for posting again. Calm down and stop beating up on each other.

Thanks.
 
I wanted to say thank you to all who have posted timelines, pictures, links to news sources and other information. After 25 years, I think it is time for LE to provide more info to the public. Or should they wait another 25 years? It's this continued refusal to release anything new that might help the public put pieces of the puzzle together that I find vexing. Perhaps I am just jaded from the way Stearns County Sheriff's Dept has handled one of my "pet cases" (Guimond). Lots of dancing around the campfire with that case, singing songs and popping corn but never dousing the flames to see what's beneath them. What is being hidden in this case and why? One would think that the FBI would have uncovered some kind of evidence that might lead to an arrest, but so far, no.

How did Jacob's abductor hide him so quickly and with enough finesse such that the dogs couldn't pick up scent (right?). Did he put Jacob inside some kind of sack and throw him over his shoulder? Or was he masterful at gagging him and rendering him unable to speak or move, allowing the perp to carry him to -- where? No buzzards spotted, no scent, no articles of clothing, no one coming forward -- who was this person that could so carefully cover all his tracks such that neither the FBI nor LE could follow his tracks?
 
This is a really long post; I'm not certain how many people will be interested in bothering to read it, I don't blame anyone who doesn't, I hope at least a few will, I'd be curious to see what it sounds like to anyone else. Since I know that DR is a main concern on this site, I just wanted to start off with this, and see whether any one else has any thoughts on the same subject.

This is from a News video from WCCO, with Dan Rassier, about the night off the abduction: http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/video...est-goes-through-day-of-wetterling-abduction/

When DR calls 911 at 11:23 it is because there are people out by his woodpile with flashlights. According to him, it is at this point that he is told that there's been a kidnapping; so, according to that, he had no idea until that minute that there had been a kidnapping. This raises two questions for me. In the interview, (about 2 mins in) he states pretty much as follows - first the woman states that he had called 911 (11:23) then he says - "and they told me there was a kidnapping, and I go "Oh, really" and that was pretty much it" - To me, the way he describes that, it sounds like, he's called 911 in order to report activity on his property, and he's told (for the first time) that 'there's been a kidnapping' and then he just says, "Oh really" and that's about it - well, is he saying that this was pretty much the extent of the conversation, in that, once they told him that, then he thought to himself, 'well that explains the men with flashlights' and told the 911 operator 'ok then' and then the call was discontinued. That is not really what's specified, but, that's the way his description sounds to me. The big thing there is, normally anyone in his position, under those circumstances would be extremely excited and wanting as much information as possible, thinking that well if it happened so close that they're searching 'My Property' then he'd be asking ''Where did the kidnapping take place, who was kidnapped, what happened?" and when he was told that it was actually right in his driveway, then he'd be even more excited and want to know every piece of information that the 911 operator would give him, such as, 'did it just happen right now?' and then he'd be told, 'no a bout 9:15' or whatever; but, listening to him tell the story, it sounds pretty much like, when he called to report the men with flashlights, that, when the 911 operator told him that there had been a kidnapping, he just said "Oh really" and then that was just about it; as if, there was no more need for conversation, that explains the men around the woodpile, and he didn't have any further need to discuss with the operator. If that was the case, then it sure makes you wonder if he had to have known about the kidnapping, in order to have such a non-reaction.

However, another side to that is; he says, the police keep telling him that he was way too nervous, way too upset, and it seemed really out of the ordinary for the circumstances; although they can't, or won't produce a copy of the recording, so, we'll just have to take their word for it. Well, if he had just innocently called to report suspicious activity on his property and then had been informed that there had been a kidnapping, on his property, then, anyone in their right mind would have a considerable reaction to that. So, the difference is, did he report the men with flashlights, incredibly nervously, which seemed Odd; then Barely React when he was told about the kidnapping? Or, did he report the men with flashlights normally, then have a very Excited Reaction, when he was told about the kidnapping? Or, maybe neither, but, we need the tape!

And, frankly, a couple things have to be considered, either way. There's No Way, that 911 should Not have Any and All 911 calls from that night. Possibly, the police are just not willing to release it. Also, the police do lie, and are allowed to under certain circumstances, to get a reaction from a suspect. So, are they just telling him that he sounded Way Out of the Norm, way too nervous, as if to make him feel like they have something on him, meanwhile, they're concealing the actual tape? To this day, after all these years, they haven't informed him of the results of his polygraph, and/or, any results from his interview under hypnosis. It's really hard to say, and unfortunately, the authorities are really not being cooperative with the public in sharing information that would be critical to have a better understanding of what happened.
 
I guess without hearing the tape it's hard to know but he had just woken up. He might have said 'oh really' at first then when he put the phone down it might have hit him then. Maybe it was a delayed reaction before all the usual questions came to mind but since he knew it was LE outside he could ask them. He did of course go out but then didn't ask anything which i suppose is strange. I personally don't believe DR did it. It's strange that LE wont even reveal the results of his polygraph or hypnosis. These things are usually reported, they haven't even told him. I understand LE have the thought of preserving evidence for a future conviction but without releasing ANY more info to the public it seems unlikely that there will be one. If i was the Wetterlings i think i would want Jacob home first before my thoughts turned to convictions. It's not that they don't want the perp caught but finding Jacob is number one priority.
 
Well, I had also taken that into consideration, that he had, or may have. just woken up, but, I honestly can't see any circumstances, including that, that any person, under the circumstances could Not be Incredibly Shaken (for lack of a better term). I have lots more thoughts on DR, but, trying to just attempt to address a couple things at one time. I personally think No Way that he is the Gunman, that he did the Act, and by himself, and there's more, but, again, can't, and/or, don't want to try and address all aspects at same time. I also think there is a lot on that interview, that I'm referring to (linked in my previous post) that makes DR look incredibly innocent. He, according to him, had no qualms at all about being questioned, doing a polygraph, having his car or property searched, being hypnotized and interviewed. I never heard anything about authorities considering him to be uncooperative in the very earliest hours, days, months of the investigation.

On another, related topic, I think that the LE should have Definitely searched his home and properties, if not that night, then they should have been secured and then searched the next day. I think DR's comment that if they had searched his house that night it'd have been all over; is him saying that if they had searched his home, etc, that night, they'd have found nothing and wouldn't be saying all these years later that he's the single POI.

Edit: 6:15 to add: I agree w/you (Scotgirl) and have been thinking the same thing, that, at this point, I think LE should be more concerned with whether they will ever be able to solve the case itself, to any degree whatsoever, before everyone involved or concerned is dead; than saying that they had to preserve the investigation to ensure prosecution. If it's ever resolved definitively, the perpetrator is going to be along in years to some extent, and I can't see how they could not get a satisfactory prosecution, regardless of information in the public domain!
 
Ok, let's start with the timeline on October 22, 1989:

TIME:
-Call to Wetterling parents to ask permission to walk to store in dark
-Boys leave Kiwi Ct
-Boys pass abduction site (DR driveway) Aaron hears noise roadside
-Boys arrive at Tom Thumb
-Boys leave Tom Thumb
9:13-Abductor approaches boys
9:15-Boys run, last sighting of Jacob by Aaron as man walks up DR driveway with him
-Boys arrive at neighbors (Merle)
9:32 -Wetterling Neighbor Merle calls cops
9:40-Cops arrive at Wetterlings
9:45-Kevin drives up and around DR driveway
-Cops arrive at DR driveway
-Wetterlings arrive home
-Cops arrive and and secure scene
11:23-DR 911 call
-DR goes to scene, tells cops he'll search his own property
-DR goes to sleep
3:00-Cops leave scene

Next day:
8:00-Cops arrive at scene in am (daybreak?) unclear of exact time
-DR drives up driveway, lifts crime scene tape and asks to leave (car full of instrument boxes which were not checked)
-Cops arrive at DR school
-Cops search DR car visually (school property not checked to this day)

Let's work with what we know for now. Time of calls are real facts. Everything else is probably an estimate but relevant to timeline.

I know there is another timeline but it is incomplete and much of it was provided by POI...I need help completing a new timeline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
265
Guests online
595
Total visitors
860

Forum statistics

Threads
608,391
Messages
18,238,928
Members
234,367
Latest member
Cholabhagat
Back
Top