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

[Wisdom]

Exactly. Why come forward after 14 years, why not right away? Brand new tires purchased locally. A new sheriff in town...

DR has commented that Kevin had nothing to do with Jacob's abduction. There is only one way for him to know that for sure.

Here is a copy of the quote from the comments section & link below.
------------------------------------------------
Dan Rassier JanetN • 2 years ago
Kevin would be quiet simply because he had nothing to do with the crime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/14/for-1st-time-person-of-interest-goes-through-day-of-wetterling-abduction/#comments

 

[emeraldine]

Somebody asked if he was hypnotized a while back. I don't remember if there was an answer then, but this article shows he was.

 

[human]

He knows a medical cop.

Seriously, though, for all these people to dismiss him, it's probably either because LE searched his car and found no trace evidence, or because he could provide them with a verifiable alibi for the rest of the day/night(or both).

They could not search the car. They could not prove much of anything because he came forward 14 YEARS later.

 

[emeraldine]

They could not search the car. They could not prove much of anything because he came forward 14 YEARS later.

This is true.

He did say he tried to come forward earlier and was brushed off, but it's still true that he could have had that car's interior washed, scrubbed, detailed and/or even replaced entirely 400 times between Jacob's abduction and the time he actually got his story to the authorities.

I wonder if there could still have been any evidence left by then, though. I've seen accounts(well, on TV, if that even counts) of people thoroughly shampooing their car interior multiple times and still being unable to get rid of all the DNA.

The question about what Kevin said to get suspicion off of him remains, though. He must have had an absolutely airtight alibi that wouldn't have allowed him sufficient time, at any time that night/day, to abduct Jacob(whatever "sufficient time" would have been).

I can't personally think of anything he could say that would 100% remove all suspicion from him.

 

[human]

DR has commented that Kevin had nothing to do with Jacob's abduction. There is only one way for him to know that for sure.

Here is a copy of the quote from the comments section & link below.
------------------------------------------------
Dan Rassier JanetN • 2 years ago
Kevin would be quiet simply because he had nothing to do with the crime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/14/for-1st-time-person-of-interest-goes-through-day-of-wetterling-abduction/#comments

Wow. JanetN is firing questions like a prosecuting attorney. Excllent questions with no good answers. Too bad!

 

[human]

This is true.

He did say he tried to come forward earlier and was brushed off, but it's still true that he could have had that car's interior washed, scrubbed, detailed and/or even replaced entirely 400 times between Jacob's abduction and the time he actually got his story to the authorities.

I wonder if there could still have been any evidence left by then, though. I've seen accounts(well, on TV, if that even counts) of people thoroughly shampooing their car interior multiple times and still being unable to get rid of all the DNA.

The question about what Kevin said to get suspicion off of him remains, though. He must have had an absolutely airtight alibi that wouldn't have allowed him sufficient time, at any time that night/day, to abduct Jacob(whatever "sufficient time" would have been).

I can't personally think of anything he could say that would 100% remove all suspicion from him.

It was his girlfriend's car.

 

[Sasquatch321]

DR has commented that Kevin had nothing to do with Jacob's abduction. There is only one way for him to know that for sure.

Here is a copy of the quote from the comments section & link below.
------------------------------------------------
Dan Rassier JanetN • 2 years ago
Kevin would be quiet simply because he had nothing to do with the crime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/14/for-1st-time-person-of-interest-goes-through-day-of-wetterling-abduction/#comments

DR says there is things he still can't discuss. How is that even possible if he only witnessed the cars from behind a window? He has told us that, so what can't he discuss more? It doesn"t make sense. He shouldnt know anymore than whats been said already.

 

[emeraldine]

Given the way the comments are worded, I wonder if he's even at liberty to discuss them. He's apparently saying that LE has all of this information, so maybe he's keeping quiet on their orders.

Of course, LE knows everything, and he's still a POI.

I wonder if there's a chance he let the abductor get away out of fear for his own safety or similar.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Given the way the comments are worded, I wonder if he's even at liberty to discuss them. He's apparently saying that LE has all of this information, so maybe he's keeping quiet on their orders.

Of course, LE knows everything, and he's still a POI.

I wonder if there's a chance he let the abductor get away out of fear for his own safety or similar.

He's not convincing me of this. Why isn't he convincing me he was only behind the window?

 

[emeraldine]

It was his girlfriend's car.

It could still exist. I don't necessarily think that her car would be any less likely to contain evidence on account of it being her car, if he was responsible.

If the car was his girlfriend's car, though, I again wonder how they cleared him. Did they just take him at his word - "we were there, and we had x size of tires on the vehicle"...?

"He was investigated and cleared."

Somehow. By D.R.'s statements?

 

[human]

Yes. The question of why is he not considered. It has to be something really obvious to everyone who has seen him.

The car could exist. Minnesota winters take care of most cars because of rust. Rust protection is better nowadays. Tires would never last that long.

His alibi that they were playing cards with the family would not do it for me. 14 years later there is no way to check that. So it has to be something in his physical being, I feel.

 

[Wisdom]

This comment was copied from the link below. Does anyone remember seeing this original sketch with the nylons and horn rimmed glasses that ran for a day or so? The glasses detail is what i'm curious about.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Renee Judkins I would love for this case to be solved, but as i recall, the very 1st composit licture shown in this case was of a man wearin a nylon over his head , & he had horn rimmed glasses on .... it ran for 1 day only ..... then .... lo and behold, Never seen again, Then..... all of a sudden the composite of the guy with the hat .... they were not the same person, but nobody ever explained away the 1st.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.facebook.com/CBSMinnesota/posts/10152518675598825

 

[human]

I never saw it. This is the first I have heard of it

 

[nmogren]

I never saw it. This is the first I have heard of it

Same here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sasquatch321]

Dan has a pretty good idea of why his farm was searched in 2010, and we talked about it at length. We may share that story one day, but not yet. There are many more details to be worked out first.

It's been 5 years now, getting a bit selfish with unheard information?

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/04/16/a-meaningful-encounter/

 

[Sasquatch321]

Dan likes to crack jokes. After you laugh about the skunk, you wonder why after the 911 operator and Deputy Bechtold told him it was a kidnapping, why he would think it's just a skunk still.


Q. Here is a good question for Dan if it hasn’t come up before. It really has to do with his mindset on supposedly telling the officer that he would go back and search his outbuildings. If it were me and it was dark outside and a person just abducted a child near my property with a gun I would be thinking there is a strong possibility they could actually be in one of those outbuildings and wouldn’t even consider searching them by myself even if I was armed. I think the entire situation would’ve been very scary and unnerving and the average person wouldn’t be able to go back to bed.

Dan’s response:

A. After making my 911 call and hearing a child was kidnapped, my reaction was immediately to leave the house and walk up the hill to see if I could do anything. I remember having no sense of any danger whatsoever. I am sure I didn’t even lock the house door behind me. Of course, at that time, I had no idea a gun was involved or what really happened. I grabbed the flashlight and walked through a grassy area leading to the road that goes up the hill. When I got to Deputy Sheriff Bruce Bechtold, I remember it was just a short exchange that a boy was taken up the road. I didn’t even know the kidnapping took place so near (or on) our farm driveway… So, searching the farm buildings in the dark was just not connected to any kind of a fear except for maybe running into a skunk.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/04/16/a-meaningful-encounter/

 

[emeraldine]

Yes. The question of why is he not considered. It has to be something really obvious to everyone who has seen him.

The car could exist. Minnesota winters take care of most cars because of rust. Rust protection is better nowadays. Tires would never last that long.

His alibi that they were playing cards with the family would not do it for me. 14 years later there is no way to check that. So it has to be something in his physical being, I feel.

Agreed. This also seems to verify that I thought: the only way they know the tire tracks truly were his is by his own word.

So, they could - maybe - have evidence with a unknown person's DNA on it, and he doesn't match it?

 

[emeraldine]

Dan likes to crack jokes. After you laugh about the skunk, you wonder why after the 911 operator and Deputy Bechtold told him it was a kidnapping, why he would think it's just a skunk still.


Q. Here is a good question for Dan if it hasn’t come up before. It really has to do with his mindset on supposedly telling the officer that he would go back and search his outbuildings. If it were me and it was dark outside and a person just abducted a child near my property with a gun I would be thinking there is a strong possibility they could actually be in one of those outbuildings and wouldn’t even consider searching them by myself even if I was armed. I think the entire situation would’ve been very scary and unnerving and the average person wouldn’t be able to go back to bed.

Dan’s response:

A. After making my 911 call and hearing a child was kidnapped, my reaction was immediately to leave the house and walk up the hill to see if I could do anything. I remember having no sense of any danger whatsoever. I am sure I didn’t even lock the house door behind me. Of course, at that time, I had no idea a gun was involved or what really happened. I grabbed the flashlight and walked through a grassy area leading to the road that goes up the hill. When I got to Deputy Sheriff Bruce Bechtold, I remember it was just a short exchange that a boy was taken up the road. I didn’t even know the kidnapping took place so near (or on) our farm driveway… So, searching the farm buildings in the dark was just not connected to any kind of a fear except for maybe running into a skunk.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/04/16/a-meaningful-encounter/

I don't know if I believe the bolded is true. Being innocent is one thing, but stretching the truth the look more innocent(IF that's what this is) is potentially incriminating all by itself.

 

[Sasquatch321]

I don't know if I believe the bolded is true. Being innocent is one thing, but stretching the truth the look more innocent(IF that's what this is) is potentially incriminating all by itself.

It's also funny he's not talking yet about the car either. He gave this answer in 2010, and says he remembers feeling no sense of danger. But the same night of the kidnapping he couldn't connect the dots of a small dark car at the time of the kidnapping, and went to sleep on it. Interesting, interesting.

 

[Wisdom]

Dan likes to crack jokes. After you laugh about the skunk, you wonder why after the 911 operator and Deputy Bechtold told him it was a kidnapping, why he would think it's just a skunk still.


Q. Here is a good question for Dan if it hasn’t come up before. It really has to do with his mindset on supposedly telling the officer that he would go back and search his outbuildings. If it were me and it was dark outside and a person just abducted a child near my property with a gun I would be thinking there is a strong possibility they could actually be in one of those outbuildings and wouldn’t even consider searching them by myself even if I was armed. I think the entire situation would’ve been very scary and unnerving and the average person wouldn’t be able to go back to bed.

Dan’s response:

A. After making my 911 call and hearing a child was kidnapped, my reaction was immediately to leave the house and walk up the hill to see if I could do anything. I remember having no sense of any danger whatsoever. I am sure I didn’t even lock the house door behind me. Of course, at that time, I had no idea a gun was involved or what really happened. I grabbed the flashlight and walked through a grassy area leading to the road that goes up the hill. When I got to Deputy Sheriff Bruce Bechtold, I remember it was just a short exchange that a boy was taken up the road. I didn’t even know the kidnapping took place so near (or on) our farm driveway… So, searching the farm buildings in the dark was just not connected to any kind of a fear except for maybe running into a skunk.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/04/16/a-meaningful-encounter/

Thanks for posting that Sas. That was my question to Dan on Joy's site and the response definitely was a head scratcher.