bucshunter
Former Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2014
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 0
Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp
Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp
Sas its hard to match the volume of posts you and human post regurgitating the same things regarding dr as the perp
Very interesting commentary.....worth pondering.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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?*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
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?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?
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.