Hi,
I'm new here but have been following this case for a long time and have read all of the posts in the various threads. I have some theories.
I am interested in discussing the reflective vest that Jacob was wearing that night, because I think it could provide some insight as to what type of escape route the perp might have taken. The vest is reflective; it is meant to draw attention to someone working in a dark area. Some have argued that the perp might have escaped on horseback or travelled on foot with Jacob. If this is the case, why not have Jacob ditch the vest at the point of the abduction? The perp took the time to have the boys lie down and identify their ages. Demanding that Jacob leave the vest behind, right with the bikes, would have made sense if the perp was planning to travel a ways outside--either on foot, horseback, or whatever. This leads me to believe that the perp must have expected to get inside--whether into a car or a building--very quickly. The perp was not too worried about being seen. Maybe I'm making too much of this, but it's something new to consider.
Second, a man named Al Rassier was mayor of St. Joseph for many years, including at the time of the abduction. He was just defeated last November. Al is the same age as DR. Does anyone have any info on whether or not these two men are related? Cousins, perhaps? If a relative of DR was mayor at the time of the abduction, this might explain why LE was hesitant to "tear up" the family farm at the time of the abduction. I haven't been able to find a good answer to this question about a possible relationship between Al Rassier and DR.
Third, statement analysis of DR's recent interviews. I have been researching statement analysis of other famous cases, including JonBenet Ramsey and Lacey Peterson. There is a great website here
http://www.statementanalysis.com/cases
One thing that I've picked up on is that repeated denials of guilt is often a sign of deception. For example, repeating the word "no" several times when asked whether or not one is guilty. DR does this in part I of his interview with Julie Nelson; he tells Nelson that he said "no, no, no" when Patty Wetterling asked him if he had anything to do with Jacob's disappearance. Here is the link:
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=875911&catid=396
Saying "I had absolutely nothing" is also a sign of deception, as the word "absolutely" is viewed as an attempt to convince listeners of something. Scott Peterson used the same kind of language.
Also, attempting to focus on the "real" killer or perp is another indicator of deception. Remember OJ Simpson insisting that he wanted to find the "real" killer? Scott Peterson did the same kind of thing when discussing his wife Lacey's disappearance. The URL above goes through these examples if anyone is interested. DR tends to emphasize that he wants to "help" with the case (at least now, 20+ years later) and he tries to focus on hope that Jacob might still be alive. Scott Peterson tries to do the same thing in many interviews he gave.
I'm not suggesting that any of this proves that DR is the perp, but his statements are very interesting and potentially revealing. He is the only person with reasonable means and opportunity to commit the crime, IMO. Look forward to discussing more.
