MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #17

[bucshunter]

Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp

 

[human]

Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp

You are confused. DR as the POI.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp

I'm pleased with the conversation and progress. And to be honest, not sure how much more we can shake without LE's help.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Because of my affliction with DR, the story that DR did not report the cars until the next morning, was added into Elocs book " It Can't Happen Here". My time spent discussing him has been heard and verified as new fact for the public.

 

[human]

I think it would be great if we had sub forums.

That way the information would be in easy locations and people could look there instead of having to post the information over and over again.

 

[cGorg]

RBBM So the POI (who contaminated the crime scene) clears an (until much later) undocumented intruder who contaminates the crime scene? Really?

Key rule here... A perp in many cases will himself/herself or using an associate(s), attempt to insert themselves into the search and investigation to keep tabs on what LE knows so they can remove or contaminate evidence or influence the investigation.

Very interesting commentary.....worth pondering.

 

[StinkSprings]

Fact? Post the transcript from the 911 call verifying that he didn't speak with the operator about the cars he saw that evening. Your statement carries no water at all w/o the transcript and there are no "new facts" attributed to this. In fact, I would heavily argue against even DR's statements that evening, as he was woken from a slumber and his "memory" of those events years later would be akin to me asking you what you had for breakfast on June 10th, 1996.

Because of my affliction with DR, the story that DR did not report the cars until the next morning, was added into Elocs book " It Can't Happen Here". My time spent discussing him has been heard and verified as new fact for the public.

 

[StinkSprings]

PM sent.

If a child board is developed for non-DR discussions will any members who steer the conversation back towards DR on those boards have repercussions?

No "luck"required, just a pm.

If you guys really want a forum, I'll be happy to oblige. But it takes some time and effort to set one up properly, and I don't have time to waste. On a couple of recent cases, I've spent hours organizing information into topic specific threads, only to be met with insults and protests from members who refused to move away from a one thread, general discussion format. So before I go through that again, I need to hear from you.

I invited responses from you last week, and received requests in pm's from only two members. They presented good arguments for a sub-forum, and I'd be happy to oblige, but I'd like to know that at least half of the regular posters are in agreement. You can send a pm to me right from this post just by clicking on my name. I'm here to help you, so let me know, yea or nay.

Bessie

 

[ELOCsoul]

Fact? Post the transcript from the 911 call verifying that he didn't speak with the operator about the cars he saw that evening. Your statement carries no water at all w/o the transcript and there are no "new facts" attributed to this. In fact, I would heavily argue against even DR's statements that evening, as he was woken from a slumber and his "memory" of those events years later would be akin to me asking you what you had for breakfast on June 10th, 1996.

DR has been consistent in saying he first told LE about the cars when he was interviewed at school the morning following the abduction. He's said so in interviews more than once. He says he told LE and the SC Times reporter about both cars on that Monday, but that the newspaper only reported on one of the cars.

 

[human]

It will be good to have a sub forum so these facts can be delineated and not have to be justified and linked over and over and over again,

 

[chaplain1]

I would heavily argue against even DR's statements that evening, as he was woken from a slumber and his "memory" of those events years later would be akin to me asking you what you had for breakfast on June 10th, 1996.

I don't think this is a good analogy. I remember September 11th pretty well, that is probably the only comparable event. Maybe the Challenger disaster.

 

[human]

For me, the day Kennedy was shot. And Columbine shooting which changed schools. Mandatory lock down practice once a month.

 

[StinkSprings]

And on what information do you have that DR considers this on par with other huge tragedies he's witnessed or has been a victim of? If you recall his reaction was, "O really?" Does that sound like the reaction of someone who would put this event up there with the most dramatic of his life? I would argue that in time it has become the most dramatic, but at that point and time of his life it appears it wasn't.

In that case, I ask you again, what did you have for breakfast on June 19th, 1996?

I don't think this is a good analogy. I remember September 11th pretty well, that is probably the only comparable event. Maybe the Challenger disaster.

 

[StinkSprings]

You've called it down the middle for the most part ELOCSOUL. However, for the people liking your comment that have hinted at DR's guilt I ask you this, why do you believe him here and not in everything else he's said about the case? And for the record there is NO PUBLIC DOCUMENTATION to verify what he did or didn't say that night on the phone with 911.

DR has been consistent in saying he first told LE about the cars when he was interviewed at school the morning following the abduction. He's said so in interviews more than once. He says he told LE and the SC Times reporter about both cars on that Monday, but that the newspaper only reported on one of the cars.

 

[human]

You've called it down the middle for the most part ELOCSOUL. However, for the people liking your comment that have hinted at DR's guilt I ask you this, why do you believe him here and not in everything else he's said about the case? And for the record there is NO PUBLIC DOCUMENTATION to verify what he did or didn't say that night on the phone with 911.

Are you saying once again that DR is a liar?

 

[Sasquatch321]

You've called it down the middle for the most part ELOCSOUL. However, for the people liking your comment that have hinted at DR's guilt I ask you this, why do you believe him here and not in everything else he's said about the case? And for the record there is NO PUBLIC DOCUMENTATION to verify what he did or didn't say that night on the phone with 911.

Actually there is documentation. Straight from the horses mouth-

“They told me it was a kidnapping, and I go, ‘Oh, really?’ That was pretty much it, and I walked up the hill and talked to one of the sheriff’s people,” Rassier said. http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/...est-goes-through-day-of-wetterling-abduction/

That was pretty much it. He did not report the cars during the 911 call, nor minutes later with bechtold (cause if he had why would he have said "well I'll go check it down here"), nor did he say anything when crossing the crime scene tape the next morning.

 

[dreddlock]

Indeed.I'm not sure how much of a car historian you are or if you're old enough to have remembered this era, so apologies if I'm telling you what you already know. GM had what in the long term turned out to be a disastrous habit of using the same small number of what they called "platforms" across all their brands such that eventually there was not much difference between, say, a Chevrolet Caprice Classic and an Oldmobile 88 and a Pontiac Bonneville. All their models based on the same platform looked alike, even across different brands.The Monte Carlo and the Grand Prix of this era shared the same platform, they were the "G" series of cars, later for no reason re-designated the "A" series. You can google these and read wiki articles about them, if interested. In essence, anyone who was familiar with say a Monte Carlo might easily call any GM G/A platform car "a Monte Carlo", even if in reality it was in fact a Grand Prix, an Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme or a Buick Regal.Exactly.If you believe Websleuths and the online community is a useful way to solve crimes, and I do, it is with this evidence that you start. If others believe we shouldn't second guess the cops or victim family members or other bloggers or potential suspects themselves, I am not sure why they would participate in this board if their constant retort is going to be, "the cops already looked at this/they have more evidence than us/accept what they say without question." The primary basis of this board is that the crime is unsolved. Therefore the cops have inherently failed their objective regardless of how much information they have. Whether their failure is due to mistakes, disorganization, getting overwhelmed, incompetence, lack of resources, lack of training, disinterest, political considerations, etc. is not really our best focus, we should start with the facts we have and work from there - in my view..........My basic feel on Kevin is that he has come out with a story that answers any evidence (such as witness testimony, tire tracks) of him being in all the same places the abductor would likely be. The story is ridiculous. But, I don't think he's the criminal here, so why do you think he using deception?777

first, if i were investigating, i would start with dr and kevin. *they are the two that put THEMSELVES at the crime scene. * lately there have been abductions surfacing where the abductor is closer to home(a local) than first assumed to be. that is to say not a wandering serial killer but soemone in the community.777, i wouldnt go as far to say that kevin is innocent. *his story is seemingly too perfect to explain away every detail putting him in the middle of the abduction, but it just doesnt add up. *it doesnt make sense. *to answer your question 777. *could it be possible that police discussed with mrs wetterling and they decided to clear him publicly to let his guard down. *to let him think his fantastical story worked,(just because someone says soemthing doesnt make a fact or factual) and say he was clear so they could investigate more closely and let his guard down so he may slip up or make a mistake? *they are in fact watching him. *777, perhaps a possibility?*

 

[dreddlock]

Regarding Kevin, I am 100% confident he is not involved in Jacob's kidnapping. I agree with several posters that his story is very odd, but IMO he was absolutely not involved in the crime. If he were, he would have had no reason to come forward in 2003. It was a risky move for him to come forward if he were involved. We should focus on what is odd about his story, and what explanations there may be for those oddities.

what if he is getting cocky? he went to police and they cleared him and he goes public because he thinks he is too smart to be caught? he is taunting everyone no?

 

[cGorg]

what if he is getting cocky? he went to police and they cleared him and he goes public because he thinks he is too smart to be caught? he is taunting everyone no?

No. He is not. Simple as that.

 

[ELOCsoul]

You've called it down the middle for the most part ELOCSOUL. However, for the people liking your comment that have hinted at DR's guilt I ask you this, why do you believe him here and not in everything else he's said about the case? And for the record there is NO PUBLIC DOCUMENTATION to verify what he did or didn't say that night on the phone with 911.

I've always thought the bigger question, regardless of when DR told LE about the cars, is why didn't LE ask for the public's help in identifying those cars? I can think of the following reasons:

1. LE figured out those cars right away. This is possible, but it could be argued that this means Kevin came forward and was known right away. It also seems that if LE knew these two cars, that they would have used this information as leverage against DR during questioning. There is no indication that they did so.

2. LE didn't believe DR. This is curious, because then it would seem he would have been treated as more of a suspect from the very beginning. I think he may have been a suspect right away, but not necessarily a top suspect.

3. LE didn't properly digest or hear what DR told them. This is highly doubtful because no matter what one's opinion of LE's competence is, this is a very basic level and it's almost unfathomable they missed this.

4. LE believed DR, but held this information close to the vest, so as to not spoil the information. This is possible I suppose, but it would seem the immediate urgency would be to find Jacob, and releasing the information about the cars would possibly help find him.

Any other ideas??