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

[Sasquatch321]

Two vehicles? i thought there was only Kevin's and the one DR saw earlier in the day

DR saw the tan monte carlo from earlier in the day and a small dark blue car at the time of the abduction. It appears from Dans Story on Joy Bakers blog that he never saw kevins car.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/02/23/dans-story-2/

 

[Trackergd]

DR saw the tan monte carlo from earlier in the day and a small dark blue car at the time of the abduction. It appears from Dans Story on Joy Bakers blog that he never saw kevins car.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/02/23/dans-story-2/

And there may be a good reason for that.... :facepalm:

 

[nmogren]

What's up with the disappearing teaser? Not sharing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave K]

Here's something that I've been wondering about concerning Kevin's car and tire tracks, that doesn't seem to make sense.

For good reason, there was great attention paid to the tire tracks found in DR's driveway. According to Kevin (who says they're his), his tires had just been installed one week earlier at a St. Cloud tire dealer; if the tracks in question were in fact his; I can't begin to imagine Any Investigation that did not discover that. For one thing, if they were in fact 1 week old tires, it seems to me much more likely than not, that at least one investigator would have recognized that the tracks were made by 'new' tires. This in itself gives you some lead. Other than that; wouldn't investigators have gone to local car and tire dealers for some distance around the St. Joseph area to see whether they could identify what kind of tires had made the tracks, then, from there, investigated the dealers to see who sold and maybe even installed the tires; especially if it had been done only one week earlier. It really seems to me that, even without Kevin coming forward in 2003 that the investigation should have uncovered that information a long time ago.

Following that, whether it's actually an LE position or not, the concept that after Kevin came forward in 2003 and stated that he had driven up the driveway, etc., that for that reason LE discounted that a vehicle had been involved, makes absolutely No Sense Whatsoever! None! I can see No Reason why/how LE could or should conclude that a vehicle was not used.

 

[Shay]

Here's something that I've been wondering about concerning Kevin's car and tire tracks, that doesn't seem to make sense.

For good reason, there was great attention paid to the tire tracks found in DR's driveway. According to Kevin (who says they're his), his tires had just been installed one week earlier at a St. Cloud tire dealer; if the tracks in question were in fact his; I can't begin to imagine Any Investigation that did not discover that. For one thing, if they were in fact 1 week old tires, it seems to me much more likely than not, that at least one investigator would have recognized that the tracks were made by 'new' tires. This in itself gives you some lead. Other than that; wouldn't investigators have gone to local car and tire dealers for some distance around the St. Joseph area to see whether they could identify what kind of tires had made the tracks, then, from there, investigated the dealers to see who sold and maybe even installed the tires; especially if it had been done only one week earlier. It really seems to me that, even without Kevin coming forward in 2003 that the investigation should have uncovered that information a long time ago.

Following that, whether it's actually an LE position or not, the concept that after Kevin came forward in 2003 and stated that he had driven up the driveway, etc., that for that reason LE discounted that a vehicle had been involved, makes absolutely No Sense Whatsoever! None! I can see No Reason why/how LE could or should conclude that a vehicle was not used.

Very interesting!

I've considered the possibility that there is no Kevin. What if LE suspected DR all along (due to inconsistencies, etc) but felt "stuck" with the investigation. Why not stir the pot a bit and make the POI uncomfortable by announcing someone came forward and admitted to making the tracks, thus no vehicle was used and the perp must be local.

IMO only!

 

[bessie]

What's up with the disappearing teaser? Not sharing?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The "teaser" was removed by me. It's called "inviting", and it's not allowed. Review the rules.

Thanks.

 

[Trackergd]

The "teaser" was removed by me. It's called "inviting", and it's not allowed. Review the rules.

Thanks.

Sorry about that Bessie. I was bursting at the seams. I'll take that admonishment.

 

[nmogren]

Very interesting!

I've considered the possibility that there is no Kevin. What if LE suspected DR all along (due to inconsistencies, etc) but felt "stuck" with the investigation. Why not stir the pot a bit and make the POI uncomfortable by announcing someone came forward and admitted to making the tracks, thus no vehicle was used and the perp must be local.

IMO only!

I believe we have discussed this before and wondered if it was an fbi tactic to shake things up with DR and there really was no Kevin.

Also, wasn't there a news video at one point interviewing Kevin with his face blurred when he came forward in 2004? I know there was a video at one point with DRs face blurred, but I thought I remembered Kevin as well?

And who has Joy been talking to when talking to "Kevin?"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dave K]

Very interesting!

I've considered the possibility that there is no Kevin. What if LE suspected DR all along (due to inconsistencies, etc) but felt "stuck" with the investigation. Why not stir the pot a bit and make the POI uncomfortable by announcing someone came forward and admitted to making the tracks, thus no vehicle was used and the perp must be local.

IMO only!

For what it's worth; at this point, I'm not able to come to Any conclusions about "Kevin" except to point out what I had about the tracks, etc..., and to say that, in my last post I really felt like I should put Kevin in quotes, like "Kevin" because I'm really not certain anyone knows anything about him. I had said the same thing in a previous post. Actually, I have another post pretty much just on the subject of Kevin, that I'm kind of working on.

I think that most agree, that it's borderline unbelievable that Kevin and his girlfriend's brother, who worked at the fire station that night and "discussed" the fact that the FBI was making casts of tracks in DR's driveway, and Neither of them bothered to come forward for 14 years till 2003. It's just something that's borderline beyond belief.

I just don't know. Like I said, other than that, I don't have any real conclusions about Kevin; but, I do have questions. As I put it in my other post, not posted yet, that the whole scenario brought about concerning Kevin, leaves us with "Unknowns" and even though I don't really think in any way that Kevin's responsible, at all; given the circumstances, it would be good to be able to clear up any "Unknowns" that we can. If we can.

 

[Trackergd]

Here's something that I've been wondering about concerning Kevin's car and tire tracks, that doesn't seem to make sense.

For good reason, there was great attention paid to the tire tracks found in DR's driveway. According to Kevin (who says they're his), his tires had just been installed one week earlier at a St. Cloud tire dealer; if the tracks in question were in fact his; I can't begin to imagine Any Investigation that did not discover that. For one thing, if they were in fact 1 week old tires, it seems to me much more likely than not, that at least one investigator would have recognized that the tracks were made by 'new' tires. This in itself gives you some lead. Other than that; wouldn't investigators have gone to local car and tire dealers for some distance around the St. Joseph area to see whether they could identify what kind of tires had made the tracks, then, from there, investigated the dealers to see who sold and maybe even installed the tires; especially if it had been done only one week earlier. It really seems to me that, even without Kevin coming forward in 2003 that the investigation should have uncovered that information a long time ago.

Following that, whether it's actually an LE position or not, the concept that after Kevin came forward in 2003 and stated that he had driven up the driveway, etc., that for that reason LE discounted that a vehicle had been involved, makes absolutely No Sense Whatsoever! None! I can see No Reason why/how LE could or should conclude that a vehicle was not used.

New tires have casting sprue nubs. They look like whiskers and wear off after a couple of weeks.

They should have stood out in tracks like a house on fire, even if most of the track had been obscured by other activity. This should have been caught by both the investigators and the FBI.

So:

1. There are "new tire" tracks in the print field that turn around - Kevin is telling the truth.
2. There are no "new tire" tracks anywhere in the print field - Kevin is lying....why would he lie?
3. If Jacobs last prints end at a set of "new tire tracks"...anyone can do the math.
4. If Jacobs prints end at tire prints that do not appear to have been made by new tires, it was one of the other two cars.

That was some great detective work Dave K.

 

[Shay]

I believe we have discussed this before and wondered if it was an fbi tactic to shake things up with DR and there really was no Kevin.

Also, wasn't there a news video at one point interviewing Kevin with his face blurred when he came forward in 2004? I know there was a video at one point with DRs face blurred, but I thought I remembered Kevin as well?

And who has Joy been talking to when talking to "Kevin?"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't recall the previous discussion...sorry.

"Kevin" could be someone as simple as an under-cover cop.

 

[nmogren]

It can't be "Kevin" if he didn't arrive until after the abduction.

If LE missed finding the tires were just bought in St. Cloud it wouldn't surprise me at all. Have they gotten anything right about the abduction?

This seems like this has all been discussed before.

Also, do we really know there were 2 other cars?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[scotgirl]

If there is a 'Kevin' which there must be otherwise who has Joy been talking to, with his new tires they must have been able say pretty quickly whether or not the tyre tracks were his even 14 years later as ther took casts didn't they?. As it must have been clear according to Tracker that they were new tyres then maybe it's more likely DR saw Kevin's car and just got the make/colour wrong. IMO i think the abductors car was parked part of the way up the drive and the boys didn't see it or hear it leave as they were halfway home by then. It's hard to think like these monsters but if i were to abduct a child i would definately use a vehicle.
It's an interesting theory of there being no Kevin, not one i had thought of before. I'll need to think some more on how that fits :thinking:

 

[ELOCsoul]

Here's something that I've been wondering about concerning Kevin's car and tire tracks, that doesn't seem to make sense.

For good reason, there was great attention paid to the tire tracks found in DR's driveway. According to Kevin (who says they're his), his tires had just been installed one week earlier at a St. Cloud tire dealer; if the tracks in question were in fact his; I can't begin to imagine Any Investigation that did not discover that. For one thing, if they were in fact 1 week old tires, it seems to me much more likely than not, that at least one investigator would have recognized that the tracks were made by 'new' tires. This in itself gives you some lead. Other than that; wouldn't investigators have gone to local car and tire dealers for some distance around the St. Joseph area to see whether they could identify what kind of tires had made the tracks, then, from there, investigated the dealers to see who sold and maybe even installed the tires; especially if it had been done only one week earlier. It really seems to me that, even without Kevin coming forward in 2003 that the investigation should have uncovered that information a long time ago.

Following that, whether it's actually an LE position or not, the concept that after Kevin came forward in 2003 and stated that he had driven up the driveway, etc., that for that reason LE discounted that a vehicle had been involved, makes absolutely No Sense Whatsoever! None! I can see No Reason why/how LE could or should conclude that a vehicle was not used.

I agree with you on the new tires treads. Great thinking on your part. I inquired about tracks last year and was told by LE they had good tire track people on the case, in the lab.

One thing to point out here is that the car wasn't Kevin's, it was his girlfriend's.

 

[Sasquatch321]

I agree with you on the new tires treads. Great thinking on your part. I inquired about tracks last year and was told by LE they had good tire track people on the case, in the lab.

One thing to point out here is that the car wasn't Kevin's, it was his girlfriend's.

The new tire tread is like finding a needle in a haystack. Maybe a new car was used for all they knew. Hundreds of people get new tires daily in the surrounding area.

 

[nmogren]

Lil Lil is offline
Registered User
Join Date
Aug 2003
Posts
58
"They did interview both those men on the news. The neighbor "suspect" was getting out of his car when the reporter approched him. They said the reporter talked to him for 2 hours but they did not recount much for the program. They also had one of those blurry boxes over his face so not to identify him. Also, hearing and seeing "Kevin" you could hear his sincerity about what he was thinking when he was only 21. He didn't think he had seen anything. What I find interesting is that the person that gave the account of a car was the neighbor "suspect". Very suspicious! Where was he that he could see and here the car?" From thread #1

Both of them were in a televised news interview on fox9 but the link no longer works.

 

[shergal]

Lil Lil is offline
Registered User
Join Date
Aug 2003
Posts
58
"They did interview both those men on the news. The neighbor "suspect" was getting out of his car when the reporter approched him. They said the reporter talked to him for 2 hours but they did not recount much for the program. They also had one of those blurry boxes over his face so not to identify him. Also, hearing and seeing "Kevin" you could hear his sincerity about what he was thinking when he was only 21. He didn't think he had seen anything. What I find interesting is that the person that gave the account of a car was the neighbor "suspect". Very suspicious! Where was he that he could see and here the car?" From thread #1

Both of them were in a televised news interview on fox9 but the link no longer works.

KMSP-TV Fox 9 Transcript
The transcript for that missing video (Kevin's portion) is at this link. I sure wish they hadn't deleted that video.

http://www.immelman.us/news/jacob-wetterling-rassier-search/#high_1
(You have to scroll down to the photo of two people talking. That is DR and Trish Van Pilsum)

http://www.immelman.us/news/jacob-wetterling-rassier-search/#high_1

 

[Trackergd]

It can't be "Kevin" if he didn't arrive until after the abduction.

If LE missed finding the tires were just bought in St. Cloud it wouldn't surprise me at all. Have they gotten anything right about the abduction?

This seems like this has all been discussed before.

Also, do we really know there were 2 other cars?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do we have any objective evidence that "Kevin" did not arrive until after the abduction? According to DR, he did not see Kevin's car drive in and turn around.

 

[nmogren]

Just the 3 witnesses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trackergd]

Just the 3 witnesses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK. So if "Kevin" drove up the driveway and turned around and was seen by three witnesses, those tire prints should have been obvious as heck in the print field.