MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #16

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Or it could be that Trevor and Aaron told Patty that the guy grabbed their crotches. Can't we just accept Patty's word for it and move on??? She's the last person that would put false or misleading information out there about her son's abduction, including the motive.
 
I don't think the perp.'s statement about the Red Carpet is relevant. Maybe it was intended to throw Jared off. If the perp. was really associated with The Red Carpet, he wouldn't have mentioned it.
 
IMO it was a ruse to allow him(Jared's perp) to make his way back home in the opposite direction.
As for the groping alleged in Jacob's case...I think it's a logical assumption in a sexually motivated case. Why else lay the boys down and 'interrogate' them in an orderly, logical sequence?
 
Even without groping having been involved, the details the boys gave have always seemed to me to show a clear sexual motive. He made them toss away their bikes and lie down in a vulnerable position, and then made a point to compare their faces before choosing which boy to take.

I believe the boys if they told anyone they were groped...if for no other reason, then simply because it would be humiliating to admit something like that happened to you when you were a child. Information like this would probably only be given to a trusted person(like Jacob's mother), and it could take some time to work up the courage to reveal it.

There's really no benefit to saying it if it didn't happen.

I have difficulty believing a priest/monk/older "friend" was responsible...or that anyone else the boys may have known was responsible. I think it was a crime of opportunity - if the perp did know the boys(or if he didn't know them, but had stalked them and planned to abduct one of them), he probably wouldn't have needed to ask them their ages or compare their faces.

He could have been anyone, from anywhere. He might have driven around all over the place in search of an opportunity to do this sort of thing, before he found these boys. Money/revenge/obsession/etc. seem very unlikely as motives.
 
From It Can't Happen Here, pg. 152:

"On October 22, 1990, Trevor Wetterling and Aaron Larson re-enacted Jacob's abduction. The purpose of the re-enactment was to gain media attention and promote the continued search for Jacob and his abductor. A candle in a jar, wrapped by a white ribbon, marked the abduction site. Investigators on horses were positioned in the surrounding fields as they watched the boys act out what had happened that night a year ago. Cameras recorded the event. Following the re-enactment, an ash tree was planted in Jacob’s honor at nearby Centennial Park. A plaque, which bore a message from Jacob’s family, was placed by the newly planted tree. A dozen homing pigeons that had been donated by Patty's sister, Barbara, were released as part of the ceremony." (31)

Has anyone ever seen the video of this re-enactment? It would be interesting to see Trevor and Aaron acting it out, just to see if anything jumped out at us as being significant. It could be it's the property of the Wetterlings, or LE now. I did try searching online for it, but couldn't find it. I'm wondering if when that ID show titled "A Mother's Search" was produced if they went off this re-enactment tape at all? Because I remember we noted some discrepancies in that - the abductor approaching from the wrong direction, etc.
 
emeraldine said:
Even without groping having been involved, the details the boys gave have always seemed to me to show a clear sexual motive. He made them toss away their bikes and lie down in a vulnerable position, and then made a point to compare their faces before choosing which boy to take.

I believe the boys if they told anyone they were groped...if for no other reason, then simply because it would be humiliating to admit something like that happened to you when you were a child. Information like this would probably only be given to a trusted person(like Jacob's mother), and it could take some time to work up the courage to reveal it.

There's really no benefit to saying it if it didn't happen.

I have difficulty believing a priest/monk/older "friend" was responsible...or that anyone else the boys may have known was responsible. I think it was a crime of opportunity - if the perp did know the boys(or if he didn't know them, but had stalked them and planned to abduct one of them), he probably wouldn't have needed to ask them their ages or compare their faces.

He could have been anyone, from anywhere. He might have driven around all over the place in search of an opportunity to do this sort of thing, before he found these boys. Money/revenge/obsession/etc. seem very unlikely as motives.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering why he asked the names though. I can see a child molester asking ages, and wanting to look at their faces, and the alleged groping, but why would a stranger abduction care what their name is? He must have wanted to know their names for a reason. Maybe Jacob was stalked for a while before this happened, and maybe that's why he wanted the names. Or maybe it was done by someone that knows the family.

Someone driving around from another state/another area probably wouldn't care about names. At first I thought it might be someone from out of state when I first heard about the abduction, but the more I read about it, the whole thing seems planned, and by someone familiar with the area.
 
Jewelia said:
I'm wondering why he asked the names though. I can see a child molester asking ages, and wanting to look at their faces, and the alleged groping, but why would a stranger abduction care what their name is? He must have wanted to know their names for a reason. Maybe Jacob was stalked for a while before this happened, and maybe that's why he wanted the names. Or maybe it was done by someone that knows the family.

Someone driving around from another state/another area probably wouldn't care about names. At first I thought it might be someone from out of state when I first heard about the abduction, but the more I read about it, the whole thing seems planned, and by someone familiar with the area.
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for him asking the names? I have never heard that
 
Jewelia said:
I'm wondering why he asked the names though. I can see a child molester asking ages, and wanting to look at their faces, and the alleged groping, but why would a stranger abduction care what their name is? He must have wanted to know their names for a reason. Maybe Jacob was stalked for a while before this happened, and maybe that's why he wanted the names. Or maybe it was done by someone that knows the family.

Someone driving around from another state/another area probably wouldn't care about names. At first I thought it might be someone from out of state when I first heard about the abduction, but the more I read about it, the whole thing seems planned, and by someone familiar with the area.
Click to expand...

The abductor did not ask the boys their names, only their ages.
 
KeepHopeAlive said:
The abductor did not ask the boys their names, only their ages.
Click to expand...

I apologize, I read the posting I quoted wrong.

I do think a good point is made that the person who abducted Jacob could be from out of the area. However, the area is so rural/isolated, and whoever it is, I would think would have to know someone in the area to know how to get out of the area quickly enough to avoid LE.

It does make sense that asking their ages, and to look at their faces could mean he was a preferential sexual predator. Ken Lanning is an FBI agent who's written a detailed behavioral analysis that gives a better understanding of these kinds of predators.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...b1DlALaPahAMniffg&sig2=QNFx7J8Rrzz8rwbzRzfSsw
 
Jewelia said:
I apologize, I read the posting I quoted wrong.

I do think a good point is made that the person who abducted Jacob could be from out of the area. However, the area is so rural/isolated, and whoever it is, I would think would have to know someone in the area to know how to get out of the area quickly enough to avoid LE.

It does make sense that asking their ages, and to look at their faces could mean he was a preferential sexual predator. Ken Lanning is an FBI agent who's written a detailed behavioral analysis that gives a better understanding of these kinds of predators.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...b1DlALaPahAMniffg&sig2=QNFx7J8Rrzz8rwbzRzfSsw
Click to expand...

I agree that he had to have been familiar with the area. At the very least, he surely would have spent enough time there to know who/what was within earshot, since he was planning on shooting the boys if they didn't do as he demanded.

When you mentioned the possibility of the perp asking the boys their names, it occurred to me that he might even have been looking at their faces to try to determine if he might know any of them before proceeding. If that's what he was doing, then he was probably local...and I hope he was, because that can't have been a very populated place at the time.

I still think it's more likely he was just comparing them to see who he wanted to take, but anything could have happened.
 
Jewelia said:
I apologize, I read the posting I quoted wrong.

I do think a good point is made that the person who abducted Jacob could be from out of the area. However, the area is so rural/isolated, and whoever it is, I would think would have to know someone in the area to know how to get out of the area quickly enough to avoid LE.

It does make sense that asking their ages, and to look at their faces could mean he was a preferential sexual predator. Ken Lanning is an FBI agent who's written a detailed behavioral analysis that gives a better understanding of these kinds of predators.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...b1DlALaPahAMniffg&sig2=QNFx7J8Rrzz8rwbzRzfSsw
Click to expand...

Excellent document. I wish I could copy things from there to post which are differnet from what I have believed such as molesters do control themsleves. Very interesting
 
emeraldine said:
I agree that he had to have been familiar with the area. At the very least, he surely would have spent enough time there to know who/what was within earshot, since he was planning on shooting the boys if they didn't do as he demanded.

When you mentioned the possibility of the perp asking the boys their names, it occurred to me that he might even have been looking at their faces to try to determine if he might know any of them before proceeding. If that's what he was doing, then he was probably local...and I hope he was, because that can't have been a very populated place at the time.

I still think it's more likely he was just comparing them to see who he wanted to take, but anything could have happened.
Click to expand...
I agree with your earlier post that this was a crime of opportunity. And your comment that the perp was planning on shooting the boys if they didn't do what he wanted...knowing who was within earshot....intriguing comment! But my sense is that if he had actually shot a gun in that area....it would most definitely be heard...whether or not it would be paid attention to...IDK. But sound really carries at night. Schreifls(sp?) house was very nearby...one cannot mistake the sound of a gunshot even in that remote area. IMO, the gun first and his commanding voice second were his only means of control. And the gun for all intents + purposes could even have been fake-but without it-he really would not have been able to exert such immediate control. I think he knew the boys would be scared out of their wits-rightly so-and the threat of shooting them would be way more than enough to get them to comply. Shooting them would be a complete disaster for the perp and escalate the situation exponentially. So my point is: it was a sexually motivated abduction with a very calculated risk, knowing he had the element of surprise in the dark for sure, but also completely unexpected on a desolate location. Every advantage to the perp. Also, I agree that looking at the 3 boys faces suggests he was looking for his preferences and IMO....Trevor most likely too young was eliminated first. Then it amounted to a visual preference between Jacob + Aaron. Even if he was local, it may be that he really wasn't that familiar with the 3 boys...thus the 'interrogation'. One must ask: how was the perp so comfortable in taking the time for all of this? He could have simply taken a flashlight(maybe even the boy's flashlight) and shined it in the boys' faces while they were still holding their bikes(+ scooter) and grabbed Jacob and told the other two to run. But he didn't do that....he was methodical + focused-determined + efficient....disciplined enough to get what he wanted- knowing the opportunity may not come again.
 
cGorg said:
I agree with your earlier post that this was a crime of opportunity. And your comment that the perp was planning on shooting the boys if they didn't do what he wanted...knowing who was within earshot....intriguing comment! But my sense is that if he had actually shot a gun in that area....it would most definitely be heard...whether or not it would be paid attention to...IDK. But sound really carries at night. Schreifls(sp?) house was very nearby...one cannot mistake the sound of a gunshot even in that remote area. IMO, the gun first and his commanding voice second were his only means of control. And the gun for all intents + purposes could even have been fake-but without it-he really would not have been able to exert such immediate control. I think he knew the boys would be scared out of their wits-rightly so-and the threat of shooting them would be way more than enough to get them to comply. Shooting them would be a complete disaster for the perp and escalate the situation exponentially. So my point is: it was a sexually motivated abduction with a very calculated risk knowing he had the element of surprise in the dark for sure but also completely unexpected on a desolate location. Every advantage to the perp. Also, I agree that looking at the 3 boys faces suggests he was looking for his preferences and IMO....Trevor most likely too young was eliminated first. Then it amounted to a visual preference between Jacob + Aaron. Even if he was local, it may be that he really wasn't that familiar with the 3 boys...thus the 'interrogation'. One must ask: how was the perp so comfortable in taking the time for all of this? He could have simply taken a flashlight(maybe even the boy's flashlight) and shined it in the boys' faces while they were still holding their bikes(+ scooter) and grabbed Jacob and told the other two to run. But he didn't do that....he was methodical + focused-determined + efficient....disciplined enough to get what he wanted- knowing the opportunity may not come again.
Click to expand...

Um...okay...that's an odd description. It almost seems like it's intended to be an admiration of sorts, and I'm not sure what to say to it.

As for the rest...

Personally, I think his method was very awkward and amateurish...and really unwisely high-risk, since he was outnumbered 3-to-1 and probably couldn't shoot in three different directions at once if his targets decided to make a run for it on their bikes/scooters. This makes me think he lacked social skills, or maybe he became desperate because he had no other means of making contact with his intended targets(others may have sensed he had ulterior motives, and kept their children away from him).

I would almost expect him to be a first-time offender, but I don't think he is because of all the similar acts of violence against children(such as Jared) that look like they could be connected to this.

I'd never really given thought to the idea that the gun could have been fake, but now I'm thinking it's more likely that it was. If he had a mask and a gun that(maybe) seemed to be a toy, it makes even more sense that one of the boys had at first thought the incident looked like a joke...but, the risk of not taking someone who approaches like that seriously could be a very dangerous one, especially in the dark.

If it was a real gun, by chance, and he'd have fired it, someone with a bigger gun could have shown up. I wonder if he'd been watching the nearby houses for activity. If he was extremely local, he might have known enough about everyone's schedule to be able to identify patterns - and that could be one possibility for his apparent lack of concern about how much time he was spending at the scene, interrogating the boys.

My gut tells me he canvassed a large(but probably familiar) area, looking for victims to take back to wherever he was based and harm/kill them...but, as someone on another thread commented, the vast majority of missing people turn up within a very short distance(whether dead or alive) from their abduction site. Two to five miles, I think.

I keep hoping that Jacob will be found alive like Shawn Hornbeck was, but I can appreciate how much more time has passed since he went missing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 64 more.
Total: 2,136 (members: 65, guests: 2,071)

Online statistics

Members online
65
Guests online
2,071
Total visitors
2,136
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,662
Messages
18,127,972
Members
231,120
Latest member
GibsonGirl
Back
Top