MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #13

[Cappuccino]

DR stated that an unknown vehicle (like the Monte Carlo) drove up the driveway that afternoon AND a small blue car with lights close together drove around the crime scene with a small passenger that he saw from his window around the time of the abduction. Neither of those claims have been verified, and law enforcement only had 1 set of unidentified tire tracks. If DR were telling the truth, there would be 3 sets of tire tracks laid down in his driveway that were unaccounted for until Kevin came forward. Once Kevin came forward there would have been an additional 2 sets of tire tracks that were not identified. Cops identified all tracks except for Kevin's at the time of the crime. This statement alone means he is lying. Why would DR lie?

I'm not convinced he did lie. If there was only one set of tyre tracks that begs three questions...

1) What happened to the tyre tracks from the music pupil who went to the Rassier house for a lesson that day?

2) Why do Jacob's footprints stop a short way up the drive?

3) If a perp drove a short way into the drive and turned the car, and Kevin also drove a short way into the drive and turned the car, how do we know Kevin's tyre tracks didn't cover the perp's?

We're looking at clipped photographs and dealing with incomplete information, so I don't think we can be absolutely sure that there were only one set of tyre tracks on the drive. On a slightly tangential note, Kevin's story begs another question - he says he spoke to a police officer at the scene that night, so why didn't that officer tell his colleagues straight away that a car had turned in the drive?

 

[Dave K]

DR stated that an unknown vehicle (like the Monte Carlo) drove up the driveway that afternoon AND a small blue car with lights close together drove around the crime scene with a small passenger that he saw from his window around the time of the abduction. Neither of those claims have been verified, and law enforcement only had 1 set of unidentified tire tracks. If DR were telling the truth, there would be 3 sets of tire tracks laid down in his driveway that were unaccounted for until Kevin came forward. Once Kevin came forward there would have been an additional 2 sets of tire tracks that were not identified. Cops identified all tracks except for Kevin's at the time of the crime. This statement alone means he is lying. Why would DR lie?

Hi, I'm not certain, in this case, whether since you quoted my comment; whether that means that your question is directed at me or not; or, you just happened to quote my post because it mentions the vehicle, and your question is general to anyone.

For what it's worth, to start out; I do want to point out that the comment of mine that you're quoting, was simply responding to another poster's question about the picture of the Monte Carlo in the video, as to whether it was just an illustration, or an actual vehicle that had been actually searched by LE.

So, I just want to point out that, I don't believe that there's anything that I've said that would cause you to direct questions at me.

Following that, I've had a lot of questions about the tracks in DR's driveway, for a long time, that I've never bothered to bring up, at least so far, because, I don't think that we have the information to answer them.

The information that DR reported having seen two separate vehicles come onto his property and turn around at the top of the driveway, as far as I know, has been known to LE, since he was interviewed for 45 mins, the day after the abduction. I don't know of any documentation that states categorically that LE has accounted for 'all other' tire tracks in the driveway, including the top where vehicles are reported to have turned around. I have mentioned that to some extent some time ago; but, no one gave me any feedback on it. I have noticed that there have been a number of comments to the effect of that 'LE has cleared 'all other tire tracks' on the driveway, but, frankly, I don't really know whether that's true or not, and, if so, how do we know.

I'm dumbfounded and stumped at quite a few things about the investigation, that evening, and the next day. Such as why LE never went to DR's house that evening for 1) to ask if he had seen or heard anything, and 2) to question him (whoever lived there) and especially when they (would have) found out that he was there on his own with his parents out of the country, why they didn't search the house in case Jacob was there.

I don't know whether it's fact that LE has actually accounted for "All" tire tracks found on the driveway, including the turnaround at the top or not. And, frankly, I expect that there's a good chance that they never did. And, following that, as I've said a few times, I think their tire/foot print investigation was really, significantly inadequate. And, basically, for a few reasons, I don't think that we can necessarily trust whatever LE leads us to believe about track evidence at the scene. And/or, whether they really know specifically what happened.

If LE knew the day after the abduction that DR reported 2 separate strange vehicles transiting the drive that day; has LE accounted for at least both of them, and if so, what were their conclusions? Did they account for the specific turnarounds as DR described? Did they believe that the smaller darker car that DR reported that night was the perpetrator's vehicle? If they had never been able to account for the 2 strange vehicles that DR reported on Oct 23rd, then wouldn't they have had reason to question him further about that? DR never became a POI till "Kevin" came forward which was 14 years after the crime. Once, Kevin came forward, the vehicle he reported transiting the drive with, doesn't match the description of the vehicle that DR described on the drive around the time of the abduction. What did they make of that?

Also, if LE knew on Oct 23rd, that DR reported two different, strange vehicles on the day of the abduction, and that the one seen at the time of the abduction, was a smaller vehicle; are the tracks that they were investigating for 14 years, consistent with that of a 'smaller' vehicle? Are they, or are they not? If so, then had they been considering the perp's vehicle as a 'smaller' one for 14 years or so? Or, if not, then wouldn't they have to question DR about that? Or, do they think that the perp came around afterward and made another set of tracks, in which case, then they had to account for at least 3 that day, and also, likely the student who visited that day. If they'd been thinking for 14 years, that it was a smaller vehicle, does that match up with Kevin's GF's Grand Prix? If not, then what?

Kevin reported that he made the drive in a car that had Brand New, One Week old Tires, that had been installed in a small town just a few miles away, and for 14 years, LE was never able to identify them. I find that unbelievable. I did make a post on that a while back and did get some feedback on that; most notably from Tracker, who commented the "New" tires should/would have stood out like a house on fire!

So, for a number of reasons, I could go on, I don't know what we can make or trust about what LE leaves us to believe about what is known about tire tracks in DR's driveway. And/or, whether they've ever mentioned anything about 'All' tracks, except what they're now calling "Kevin's" have actually been accounted for. And, how does that comport with DR's reporting of two vehicles, and what do they make of that.

Then there's the 'whole Kevin scenario' I don't think that we really have absolute fact based knowledge of exactly what happened there. As, Shergal, mentioned very recently in her post #774:

"Maybe Kevin never went into the driveway at all. That's only what he said on Joy's blog, right? Originally, back in 2004, we were all under the impression that Kevin had just pulled into DR's driveway a bit, backed out and drove back towards Tom Thumb. That does seem much more likely, if you think about it. A local (Kevin) who claims to have known about the party spot would certainly have known DR's driveway was a dead end at their farm house.

Maybe LE just told Kevin to "say" he drove all the way in to DR's driveway to see what DR would say after that??"

There are way too many unknowns concerning evidence in the driveway. And, as I and others have said (in so many words); what we have to go by is really so limited that it's pathetic.

 

[Cappuccino]

The problem I have with this theory is it was pitch black out that night and the distance from tom thumb to the farm. This guy would have had to make a few left and right turns then go over a couple hills before pulling into the gravel driveway. Why put yourself in position on the other side of a hill that you can't see them coming for sure? Why disguise yourself but then leave your evidence behind on the driveway and also be witnessed by the person at the farm?

My theory is that he was on the main road - ie, in between the country road which the boys came from, and the Tom Thumb store. He saw which road they came out of and which direction they went to, and took a chance that they would come back they way they went. That's why he drove down that road, turned into the first turn off he found and waited.

Basically, I see this as an opportunistic crime that could very easily have gone wrong and only looks clever and carefully planned because it worked. Think Michael Devlin, Phillip Garrido, or as someone else mentioned up the page, Kenneth Parnell. That's the type of person I think did this, and he was probably driving round all day, or even for a few days, scouting various country roads and other lonely locations hoping to find a child to snatch.

 

[chaplain1]

I may agree if it weren't for the secluded location and the small window of opportunity and time for planning. The perp had to see these boys going TO Tom Thumb in order to know that they likely would come back past DR driveway. There is a very small time window of 40 minutes if that. I find it hard to believe that a person was laying in wait for a boy to walk by DR driveway in a sparsely populated, dead end street neighborhood. Also being ON a private driveway and not knowing if or when someone would come out and ask what they are doing there. Too much risk. A guy wearing a mask is not a very risky guy.

Smokey was an outside dog with the propensity to bark as well. I find it odd that he would bark at a car turning around but not at one sitting in the long driveway.

 

[Trino]

Asperger's would be my guess too, or possibly he's homosexual and very discreet about his bf's because his family might disapprove.

I think we get too focused on someone who has no gf or has never been married. I have a friend in his late 50's - farmer - who lives with his mom, has never had a gf, and has never married. He is not gay. He is the youngest child, and when his dad died, he just stayed around.

 

[Cappuccino]

Smokey was an outside dog with the propensity to bark as well. I find it odd that he would bark at a car turning around but not at one sitting in the long driveway.

I wouldn't set too much store by that - its a dog, he might have been distracted by a rabbit or an interesting smell or some other doggy preoccupation. Besides, this guy wouldn't have made his presence obvious, we're talking about a car that quietly slips into the bottom of the driveway, (which is very long), and immediately turns off the engine and the lights.

 

[Sasquatch321]

I think we get too focused on someone who has no gf or has never been married. I have a friend in his late 50's - farmer - who lives with his mom, has never had a gf, and has never married. He is not gay. He is the youngest child, and when his dad died, he just stayed around.

Your friend is fine, he hasn't been named a POI. LE has told us to be interested in DR, therefore his entire life is going to be magnified and scrutinized. Until he is cleared or convicted.

 

[human]

Don't think DR is socially nimble enough to groom victims or have a relationship.

He is a teacher in schools as well as in a super super super expensive college- St. John's

 

[human]

Jared stated several months ago in the public section on Joy's blog that he dismissed DR as his abductor. So...not sure why this is a new idea.

Not a clear writer. Sorry.

My new idea is that DR knows Jared's abductor. That is why he had an alibi ready for that night years and years later. Who would remember what they were doing decades later?

 

[human]

I wouldn't set too much store by that - its a dog, he might have been distracted by a rabbit or an interesting smell or some other doggy preoccupation. Besides, this guy wouldn't have made his presence obvious, we're talking about a car that quietly slips into the bottom of the driveway, (which is very long), and immediately turns off the engine and the lights.

Dogs bark at strange cars and strange events. Plus they sense fear and bad intentions.

 

[Cappuccino]

Not a clear writer. Sorry.

My new idea is that DR knows Jared's abductor. That is why he had an alibi ready for that night years and years later. Who would remember what they were doing decades later?

What was his alibi for the night of Jared's abduction?

 

[Sasquatch321]

Not a clear writer. Sorry.

My new idea is that DR knows Jared's abductor. That is why he had an alibi ready for that night years and years later. Who would remember what they were doing decades later?

DR would because he stated himself that his journal can account for every day going back to his trip to europe in the early eighties.

 

[human]

My theory is that he was on the main road - ie, in between the country road which the boys came from, and the Tom Thumb store. He saw which road they came out of and which direction they went to, and took a chance that they would come back they way they went. That's why he drove down that road, turned into the first turn off he found and waited.

Basically, I see this as an opportunistic crime that could very easily have gone wrong and only looks clever and carefully planned because it worked. Think Michael Devlin, Phillip Garrido, or as someone else mentioned up the page, Kenneth Parnell. That's the type of person I think did this, and he was probably driving round all day, or even for a few days, scouting various country roads and other lonely locations hoping to find a child to snatch.

People have posted several times on here the topography,the curves.

And DR's is not the first driveway.

 

[Cappuccino]

Dogs bark at strange cars and strange events. Plus they sense fear and bad intentions.

Dogs don't always behave the way humans think they should behave. I've seen children abducted from within their own home and the dog didn't bark - I've seen family members falsely accused for that reason too, ie the dog didn't bark therefore it must have been an inside job.

 

[Cappuccino]

People have posted several times on here the topography,the curves.

And DR's is not the first driveway.

Its not now, but it was in 1989.

 

[human]

I firmly believe that Jared and Jacob were abducted by the same person, so if Jared dismisses DR as his abductor then that's a big plus in DR's favour. There's also the fact that DR has been teaching for decades, and not a single person has ever accused him of anything. If he was that way inclined you would think at least one past pupil would have appeared at this stage to say so.

We have no idea if anyone has said a thing.

 

[human]

Its not now, but it was in 1989.

No, it absolutley was not the first driveway.

There were at least 10 houses on the street up ahead of DR towards the Thumb

 

[human]

Dogs don't always behave the way humans think they should behave. I've seen children abducted from within their own home and the dog didn't bark - I've seen family members falsely accused for that reason too, ie the dog didn't bark therefore it must have been an inside job.

You have seen actual abductions?

 

[human]

DR would because he stated himself that his journal can account for every day going back to his trip to europe in the early eighties.

Ok. That makes sense then.

But we still do not know if he was actually there.

There are posters for events that never happen for one reason or another. And we do not know if he went or how long he played, if he did in fact go there

 

[Cappuccino]

No, it absolutley was not the first driveway.

There were at least 10 houses on the street up ahead of DR towards the Thumb

Were those ten houses not in a little cul de sac all together at the top of the road? Unless my memory is playing tricks on me, that was the case in 1989. No abductor is going to snatch a child there, he would drive down the road and find a deserted place with no witnesses.