MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
KeepHopeAlive said:
More from Joy on her blog. She gives her take on the situation. I think she makes some good points. Take from it what you will. Keep an open mind. It might be the only way this case will ever be solved.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/04/26/my-take/
Click to expand...

I posted the following to Joy's blog today. I've asked these questions before in this forum, and I still think the answers to these questions are vitally important in the case:

There are two key details about the abduction that I think are essential in determining whether Jacob was "targeted" specifically, and possibly eliminating (in my mind) Dan Rassier as a suspect.

1. We know there was the "threat" of a gun during Jacob's abduction. However, I've read mixed information as to whether it was a rifle or a handgun. In fact, I've read an article quoting Patty that it was one or the other, and handgun or a rifle. But we all know now that reporters don't always get the words right. Does Patty know for certain which type of gun was used? And, furthermore, were Trevor and Aaron sure it was a gun - or could it have simply been something "shiny" that looked like a gun?

2. There have been several versions told detailing how Jacob was "selected" by the kidnapper. A definite, specific step by step accounting of how he was chosen is the most critical factor in this case in my opinion. I believe it was Trevor that the abductor first asked for his age? Did he order Trevor to the woods immediately after learning his age?? Or, did the kidnapper release both Trevor and Aaron only after asking all the boys' ages? Also, once the kidnapper knew Aaron's age, did he only look at Aaron's face? Or did he look at both Aaron and Jacob's face? The order in which all of this happened, especially the specific points at which each boy was ordered to run to the woods, would be very telling as to whether Jacob was selected from among the 3 boys, or whether he had been targeted all along.

I know, I know - a lot of folks have said that if the abductor were after Jacob specifically, that he would have simply asked the boys their names. However, that would have been a sure tipoff to law enforcement that Jacob had been stalked and targeted. The abductor in that case would want to choose another method of identifying which of the boys was Jacob, a method that would be more difficult to interpret as a case of a targeted kidnapping. If the abductor eliminated Trevor based on age only, and if he didn't look at Jacob's face before releasing Aaron - that almost certainly suggests that Jacob was targeted specifically.

Another question, more out of curiosity - exactly what direction were Aaron and Trevor ordered to run?
 
odyssey1492 said:
Generally, yes, a lawyer would be a good idea in a situation like this. But that approach cuts both ways. A lawyer would tell DR to stop talking and stay quiet. In the court of public opinion, I'm sure that would play against him. He would be perceived as trying to hide something. And there would be very little a lawyer could do, considering everything is sealed, except be prepared to defend DR if he were arrested.

On the other hand, if you are innocent and have nothing to hide, maybe the best approach is to speak out as DR has done in mailing those letters and telling his story. Granted, DR's approach has not been the best. In half jest, I would suggest he needs a PR person more than a lawyer.
Click to expand...

Not being a lawyer, I have no idea what could be done.

I am not thinking in terms of talking, but asking to see the evidence or who knows what .
 
That opens another question to me. Did the perp shine a light on the children's faces?

Perps like children of certain ages. 11 is a common age they like.

I do not see how Jacob could be targeted. He lived in a cul de sac that had maybe 3-5 houses on it. This is after driving for a distance where there was nothing.

Wouldn't someone notice a car following them in those circumstances?

As far as a car on the road, the road has ditches. Hard to park your car where the bottom will be ripped out of it. This was a country dirt road.

Why would a kidnapper drive up DR's driveway twice in one day? Is a kidnapper looking for children or why is a kidnapper driving down a driveway with no children on it? I do not get it
 
human said:
Not being a lawyer, I have no idea what could be done.

I am not thinking in terms of talking, but asking to see the evidence or who knows what .
Click to expand...

Law enforcement does not have to reveal or turn over any evidence related to an investigation. That's what makes it so difficult in a case like this. Nobody outside LE really knows what evidence they have or what information they have received, reviewed, rejected or accepted. For all we know, some of the questions we are asking on here they already have the answers to.

But from the perspective of a POI, there is nothing to be done except talk or keep quiet. LE does not have to turn over anything unless a person has been arrested and charged.
 
ELOCsoul said:
I posted the following to Joy's blog today. I've asked these questions before in this forum, and I still think the answers to these questions are vitally important in the case:

There are two key details about the abduction that I think are essential in determining whether Jacob was "targeted" specifically, and possibly eliminating (in my mind) Dan Rassier as a suspect.

1. We know there was the "threat" of a gun during Jacob's abduction. However, I've read mixed information as to whether it was a rifle or a handgun. In fact, I've read an article quoting Patty that it was one or the other, and handgun or a rifle. But we all know now that reporters don't always get the words right. Does Patty know for certain which type of gun was used? And, furthermore, were Trevor and Aaron sure it was a gun - or could it have simply been something "shiny" that looked like a gun?

2. There have been several versions told detailing how Jacob was "selected" by the kidnapper. A definite, specific step by step accounting of how he was chosen is the most critical factor in this case in my opinion. I believe it was Trevor that the abductor first asked for his age? Did he order Trevor to the woods immediately after learning his age?? Or, did the kidnapper release both Trevor and Aaron only after asking all the boys' ages? Also, once the kidnapper knew Aaron's age, did he only look at Aaron's face? Or did he look at both Aaron and Jacob's face? The order in which all of this happened, especially the specific points at which each boy was ordered to run to the woods, would be very telling as to whether Jacob was selected from among the 3 boys, or whether he had been targeted all along.

I know, I know - a lot of folks have said that if the abductor were after Jacob specifically, that he would have simply asked the boys their names. However, that would have been a sure tipoff to law enforcement that Jacob had been stalked and targeted. The abductor in that case would want to choose another method of identifying which of the boys was Jacob, a method that would be more difficult to interpret as a case of a targeted kidnapping. If the abductor eliminated Trevor based on age only, and if he didn't look at Jacob's face before releasing Aaron - that almost certainly suggests that Jacob was targeted specifically.

Another question, more out of curiosity - exactly what direction were Aaron and Trevor ordered to run?
Click to expand...

From reading the accounts of Trevor and Aaron, they are certain they saw a gun. Whether they actually saw a gun or just something shiny and recall it as a gun is anyone's guess. Victim's and eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable because of the stress and speed with which things happen. But everything I have read indicates that the boys were sure they saw a gun. I also recall that it has always seemed from the accounts that it was a handgun of some sort. But I don't know if any real detail has ever been offered. Also, the boys did have a flashlight, so it is possible they in fact did see the gun before they were told to turn off the flashlight.

I agree that the selection process is a critical part of this crime. And the exact details and order it played out might give us some insight into whether the perp was looking for Jacob specifically or just an 11 year old and then chose between Jacob and Aaron. The frustrating aspect of this is that different articles have recounted the details with slight variations. Some suggest all the boys were asked their ages before Trevor was told to run away. Others have told the story in a way that suggests Trevor was told to run away after giving his age.

I've also wondered the exact direction the boys were told to run, or if it was just a general instruction to run. I have wondered if the boys were told to run in a direction that specifically was away from the direction of the Wetterling home, thinking that perhaps the perp did know who Jacob was and was trying to buy himself more time by sending the boys in a direction away from where he knew they would eventually go for help.
 
Page 2 of this article indicates that the gun was a handgun. I wouldn't call this any kind of verification. But it is the only article I could find that defines the gun. This article also suggests that Trevor was told to run after giving his age. Then Aaron and Jacob were asked their ages before Aaron was told to run. They are not exact quotes from Aaron though, so take this information for what it's worth.

http://www.sctimes.com/article/20091018/NEWS01/110180043/Friend-Larson-still-hopes-happy-ending
 
Somer Thompson was kidnapped from the killer's yard while walking home from school. He kept her in the house for a time. Hours.

The search dogs did not hit on his house or yard the next day.

Reading Joy Baker's blog, there is no evidence that she has talked to anyone. There are so many instances of people making things up during these kidnappings. Fake blogs and sites.

I am reminded of Jodi Arias stories when I read some of the things in Joy's blog.
 
human said:
Reading Joy Baker's blog, there is no evidence that she has talked to anyone. There are so many instances of people making things up during these kidnappings. Fake blogs and sites.

I am reminded of Jodi Arias stories when I read some of the things in Joy's blog.
Click to expand...

Everyone can interpret anything and everything differently, that's what makes us "human" ( I am a bit of a punster, couldn't help that one - LOL!) Many of the forum sleuths have been "with" the case since the beginning, and perhaps were / are from the St. Joseph area, so it's understandable that their opinions and theories of the case have been shaped by local media attention, local "conversations", etc.

On the contrary, many of us here on Websleuths, while always familiar with Jacob's abduction, are yet relatively new to actively sleuthing this terrible and complicated crime. Myself, I did not have the benefit of the available details of the case back the day, but I've committed myself to learning all I can over the last year or so, and probably will always keep tabs going forward. I, like others I'm sure, come into this with a clean slate, evaluating what I read here and there, trying to sort out facts from fiction, from theory, from logic, etc. In doing so, it's easy for myself (and others) to have an armchair LE mentality (hindsight is 20/20 they say) - critical of LE stumbles over the years, etc.

I have been casually reading Joy's blog over the last year. What caught my interest in particular was the candid approach she displayed in her writings. I found the early writings to be informative and consistent with what I perceived to be "truths" from my other studies of the case. Above all things, I've found her past writings to be coming from a human interest angle, and politically "neutral"....I guess is a good word for it. (Note - her blog started back in 2010 following the search of the Rassier farm - it's not just a recent upstart writing).

Now, with her recent writings after interviewing Dan Rassier and Kevin - her blogs have clearly taken to a different level. I don't interpret her writing as necessarily defensive of Dan Rassier, but rather giving him a chance to tell his story so to speak. I can understand how they could be interpreted by some to be biased, but in my opinion that's because she's retelling one side of the story - Dan's side. This is a guy who's clearly been a target of the investigation for many years now. Maybe LE is spot on? Maybe Dan Rassier is lying? Maybe he is telling the truth? Maybe someone gave false testimony in an affidavit to give cause for the 2010 search? Maybe the investigators have nothing else to go on other than circumstances and opportunity?

At the end of the day - I don't see where Joy would have anything to gain by fabricating a blog. We all stand to gain by learning more about the case, and keeping an open mind to all possibilities. Simply put, we just don't have a lot else to go on. Speaking for myself, I don't take everything that Mr Rassier has said at face value either - if I have a question or something doesn't add up - I ask the question on her blog. I think I've asked some tough questions, some that could indicate doubt in my mind about what he has said. Blog comments are moderated - but she hasn't censored the questions I've asked or comments I've made. If the posts are respectful and relevant, it appears that they get published.
 
human said:
Reading Joy Baker's blog, there is no evidence that she has talked to anyone. There are so many instances of people making things up during these kidnappings. Fake blogs and sites.
Click to expand...

I realize it's the internet and people can say whatever they want, but I, personally, don't see anything in her blog that would suggest the content is fake. What kind of "evidence" would you like her to provide? If you're concerned about the information she is providing, perhaps you could contact her and ask her to verify her information in some way or another. I have not felt the need to do so, but I'm sure if you do so in a manner that is respectful, she would give you an answer, or at least acknowledge your concerns, if she feels it's necessary.
 
There have been numerous instances lately of fake sites and info regarding child kidnapping cases. The Kyron Horman case is one that was incredible with the false things that were made by a person named SoCal. She has been exposed on the web now.

WS verifies info which is good.

Jessica Ridgeway had fakes collecting money. It goes on and on.

People believe what they want.

Every time someone hits on a blog site, ca ching ca ching. Whatever,
 
Another interesting post on Joy Baker's blog. In it, she answers questions some of us asked in her comments section.

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/05/01/motivation/

I realize some posters question the legitimacy of Joy's blog. If you have that opinion, that's your opinion. But if you have no facts to actually back up such an accusation, please stop posting about it. It's irresponsible and, more importantly, it detracts from the conversation and the purpose of these boards. If you disagree with her theories, then rebut them with your own theories. But casting aspersions adds nothing to the dialogue here.

Would be curious to know what some of you think about Joy's latest post, which discusses the possible profile of the abductor.

I'm not sure where I stand on all of it. But I keep coming back to the fact that the perp was wearing a mask. If he was wearing it because he did not want to be recognized or be able to be identified later, does that mean he knew he would encounter more boys than just Jacob? Or does it mean that he didn't know that, and he intended to release Jacob but something went wrong? My thought on that point is that if this is the same person who assaulted Jared, perhaps he intended something similar here and planned to let Jacob go as he had let Jared go and the mask would prevent a description -- but something happened leading to Jacob's death rather than release. All just speculation and ideas. Wondering what others think.
 
Joy's Blog has not been verified by WS.

I think with all of the fake things that WS has exposed, it is good for readers here to be wary of things that are stated in cyberworld.

Perhaps Joy would like to be verified on WS to make her more legitimate. Otherwise, she is just another Socal to me..

I wish Joy would get her facts straight. LE identified the white van as being driven by a 20 something year old with dark hair and glasses, not a bald man.
 
Just asked Joy if she would get verified here. I see no evidence of her faking an identity and/or fabricating interviews. I would hate the conversation to get derailed over doubting her legitimacy since she has gathered some interesting information. I think it would make more sense to question DR's story or question if Joy is being manipulated rather than question if she is making the entire thing up 20+ years after the crime. Would she be pretending to be a writer in Saint Cloud or just pretend to do the interviews? If she is a real writer in Saint Cloud I don't think it's going to help her freelance career to fake conversations with Patti Wetterling. She would be vilified for doing such a horrible thing. If she is faking her whole identity and the interviews, Why fake an extensive blog with creative writing and genealogy services? Why pick a crime from so long ago that is mostly known in Minnesota? Why not pick a crime that would engender interest from a wider audience? She has no advertising on her blog so would not get paid per visit. Hardly anyone comments even on it. Where is the payoff? Not instant money or attention, which would be the motivations of a fake. However, if word gradually gets out that she was a thought-provoking, credible writer, that may create interest in her work. Any payoff to her as local crime writer would rest entirely on integrity. There are those of here who are riveted by a thoughtful interview of the major players, hoping a little clue will bring the truth into light. And we are all here hoping for justice for Jacob. Personally, even if she is misguided in this, I think Joy is too.
 
If any of you followed the Socal debacle, then you can understand the strange depths that several people went to, not just her. There was no pay off, just some kind of weird power trip.

I have said why DR makes no sense to me. The two cars. The not hearing any sirens.

The change in stories. But, who can find the truth with that.

" Kevin's" strange tale that makes no sense. The details of 20 years ago. Think of an event of 20 years ago and try to remember the details. At the time, "Kevin" did not even know that there was a need to remember anything,

I would never want to bother Patti Wtterling, but I bet there are people who see her that can ask what she thinks of this blog. Patti probably is too kind to say anything, however.
 
Most of us are familiar with BehindthePineCurtain.com, but there are other sources out there detailing abusive priests in the St Cloud area. Just sickening. Matthew Feeney was a youth minister at the catholic church in St Joseph, where Fr Tom Gillespie was a priest.

http://app.bishop-accountability.or...1=View&op=doSearch&section=a-z&sortBy=&state=

Check out the comments at the bottom of this news story:

http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/story/18877421/wanted-talent-agent-charged-in-molestation
 
human said:
The change in stories. But, who can find the truth with that.
Click to expand...

Please share with us what you perceive as the changes in stories by DR. I am looking for inconsistencies as well, but have been unable to identify any.
 
SpringThyme said:
Just asked Joy if she would get verified here.
Click to expand...

I was curious about this "verify" thing, so I checked it out. Websleuths offers verification to professionals (doctors, lawyers, counselors, etc) who wish to post answers and opinions to Websleuths. To my knowledge, Joy is not posting on this forum, so I don't know why verification would be relevant.

Copied & Pasted from the Websleuths Rules Page:

If you would like to add youself as an expert in a certain field or as an insider to a case, please send an email to wsverify@xmission.com.

If you do not wish to be identified as an expert in a certain area, we ask that you refrain from answering questions that are specifically directed to those that have been verified as specialist in their area and that you do not claim to be a professional in any area.

If a member posts with "expertise" please check to make sure they are on this list. If not, please do not take their post as professional information, but rather just as another opinion; much as you would with any member of the general posting membership.

Locals who are describing the area or are members of the gyms and that sort of thing do not need to be verified.

We only verify people who know the players or have been named in the media, etc. This does not include people who may befriend a player on internet social media and then wish to post about it.

If a member wants to post as a professional (a lawyer, shrink, and so on) or as a local/knows the people involved then they must email us at the following email.

wsverify@xmission.com

Please include:

The case
Your Websleuths name
Your phone number and a good time to call
Your real name
Location (City and State)
In the subject line please put your user name and which case you are asking to be verified on

All info will be kept strictly confidential.

Thank you!
 
Re Joy and verification.

Socal was not posting on WS either. That was the problem. She said that she had insider knowledge about the Kyron case. She had several blogs going saying all kinds of things that were totally not true.

I wonder since her blog has not been verified if information on it can even be posted on here. WS does not allow access to lots of unverified things such as FB pages, for instance.

As to DR stories, he said that he went back to bed and did not help LE. Now he is saying that he did, for example. Big change
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 210 more.
Total: 2,180 (members: 211, guests: 1,969)

Online statistics

Members online
211
Guests online
1,969
Total visitors
2,180
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,813
Messages
18,099,878
Members
230,932
Latest member
Marni
Back
Top