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

[KeepHopeAlive]

I don't know if Dan is innocent or not. I don't know the man. I only know what everyone else knows from the media. But because someone exhibits "odd" or "strange" behavior does not make them a criminal. Stating things like "no one would do this or that" seems a bit silly to me. Just because someone doesn't think it's normal behavior doesn't mean there aren't other people who do it without any ulterior motive. Some people seem to want to throw Dan under the bus for no other reason than his behavior. I sincerely hope that those people are not judged by others in a similar manner. None of this is evidence or proof. Yes, I am glad that Dan has been looked into, but until LE can prove that he committed a crime, I will be not one of those who points a finger at him or makes accusations about him (or anyone else for that matter).

I'd like to know who else LE has looked at, but I don't think they are going to give that information up so easily.

 

[odyssey1492]

You have some homework that you should catch up on if you're going to be dishing these kinds of things out. Jared, the Cold Spring victim, came forward as an adult. There's no doubt he has heard DR's voice and seen his pictures.

I could not agree more. I would add that comparing Dan's recent photo to the Cold Springs sketch is absurd. That sketch is almost 25 years old; Dan did not look the same 25 years ago.

And the fact that Dan was named a POI is not nearly as big of a deal as the fact that he was named a POI instead of being named a suspect. The police had to say something after searching his farm, saying they are interested in him doesn't tell us anything. Bottom line, there is not a shred of evidence linking Dan to this crime, other than the crime happening at his driveway entrance.

 

[odyssey1492]

I don't know if Dan is innocent or not. I don't know the man. I only know what everyone else knows from the media. But because someone exhibits "odd" or "strange" behavior does not make them a criminal. Stating things like "no one would do this or that" seems a bit silly to me. Just because someone doesn't think it's normal behavior doesn't mean there aren't other people who do it without any ulterior motive. Some people seem to want to throw Dan under the bus for no other reason than his behavior. I sincerely hope that those people are not judged by others in a similar manner. None of this is evidence or proof. Yes, I am glad that Dan has been looked into, but until LE can prove that he committed a crime, I will be not one of those who points a finger at him or makes accusations about him (or anyone else for that matter).

I'd like to know who else LE has looked at, but I don't think they are going to give that information up so easily.

Great point, we know the police have been interested in other people as well. Patti Wetterling said exactly that in her recent podcast. The fact that Dan has been the only publicly named POI means nothing and is distracting.

 

[Pensfan]

You have some homework that you should catch up on if you're going to be dishing these kinds of things out. Jared, the Cold Spring victim, came forward as an adult. There's no doubt he has heard DR's voice and seen his pictures.

You have more homework to do on repressed memories, their recovery, and rape victims.

 

[human]

You have some homework that you should catch up on if you're going to be dishing these kinds of things out. Jared, the Cold Spring victim, came forward as an adult. There's no doubt he has heard DR's voice and seen his pictures.

Remembering a voice over all of those years? That would be amazing especially under the fear conditions.

And someone cannot disguise a voice? I would think a music teacher would have real skills in understanding sound production

 

[human]

I could not agree more. I would add that comparing Dan's recent photo to the Cold Springs sketch is absurd. That sketch is almost 25 years old; Dan did not look the same 25 years ago.

And the fact that Dan was named a POI is not nearly as big of a deal as the fact that he was named a POI instead of being named a suspect. The police had to say something after searching his farm, saying they are interested in him doesn't tell us anything. Bottom line, there is not a shred of evidence linking Dan to this crime, other than the crime happening at his driveway entrance.

POI is huge after the debacle with the Atlanta bomber.

POI is not thrown out casually

 

[odyssey1492]

POI is huge after the debacle with the Atlanta bomber.

POI is not thrown out casually

You missed my point. The point is that Dan has been named a POI, not a suspect. That is a huge deal. Person of interest is used by police to generalize for someone they believe may be a suspect, or a witness, or possibly either of those. We don't know if the police used that term because they think Dan is a witness, or knows more than he is telling, but that he wasn't directly involved. The possibilities are far greater than if they named him a suspect. Bottom line is they haven't named him a suspect, which would indicate they think he is involved. Instead, they call him a POI, which doesn't tell us what they think.

 

[Pensfan]

Thanks Pensfan.

I can't find the link, but I believe Kevin had been at a party/event, years after the abduction, and was telling the story of how he arrived at the abduction site before the police to a Marshall. Kevin said that he believed the tire track that LE was searching for at the scene of the crime was in fact the tire track he made while turning around on DR's property. The Marshall talked Kevin into to going to LE with his story. I will look for a link and post the story if I am able to find the article I read.

Since you study human behavior, I would be very interested in your opinion about DR's interview (2 part interview).

http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=875911
http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=875817

JMO, but he certainly has a "strange" or "odd" demeanor at times, which makes him look guilty, especially considering the serious nature of the topic.

I've watched those videos several times.
His giggling and smirking was bizarrely inappropriate, but there were many more red flags. I'm not an expert in statement analysis, but anyone can find the big red flags in this interview. Here are a few:

1.Dan refuses to mention the words "Jacob's abduction". Instead he refers to Jacob's abduction as as "what was happening at the mailbox" and "the conspiracy".
2. Dan never makes a single reference to Jacob's abductor. Not once. (Why? Because he's the abductor, IMO.)
3. Dan never mentions how Jacob or his family has suffered.
4. Dan never mentions how the real abductor must be found.
5. Dan never mentions how he is furious that the real abductor ruined his life
(Who wouldn't be furious at the monster who ruined their life and was also a child abductor? The answer is someone who brought this investigation upon himself.)
6. Dan isn't angry at the child abductor who ruined his life, but he is very angry at the police for frightening his parents when they came to search the gravel pit.
7. Dan states the worst day of his life was the day LE came to search his gravel pit.
8. He described his parents as scared because LE came to search their property. Dan uses the word 'scared'. The innocent might be annoyed or angry if LE searched our property and took things, but Dan says his parents were scared. His parents suspect that their son, Dan, is guilty, IMO.)
9. His 50 to 60-year-old mom had to be physically held on the ground when the police arrived? (wth? Now THATS scared.) Dan's dad had to be physically restrained by Dan.
10. The Rassiers were told to leave while LE was searching, but Dan HAD to return to the property to get some papers. (Music teachers have important documents that MUST be addressed immediately and can't wait for LE searchers to to leave the property? Dan just had to know what the searchers were doing. He just had to return even though he was told to leave.)
11. When asked why he would keep a box of Jacob Wetterling memorabilia, Dan answered the question with a question. (avoidance) He stated, "Why not? Wouldn't it be weird to let all this be lost in my memory?" BIG RED FLAG
(Dan needs to keep all of his abduction memories vivid (not lost) in his mind. This is precisely why serial killers keep 'trophies'.
12.Dan has lied about not journaling about Jacob.
13. Dan kept a pleading letter from Patty, but refused to call or write her back.(Why keep this letter when he refused to acknowledge her requests? It's part of the trophy collection.)
14. Dan experienced very obvious anxiety when he mentioned having to meet with Patty. Watch as he literally can't keep his bum in his seat at this point in the video.
15. Dan exhibits more inappropriate smirking and giggling when he mentions how he sat down and talked with Jacob's mom at her invitation.
16. At the last opportunity Dan had to demand that LE find the real abductor of the monster that abducted Jacob and ruined his life (actually himself), Dan refuses to do it. Instead, Dan ends his interview with trying to manipulate people into believing that Jacob is alive. (in other words, stop looking for the abductor. Everyone should just have hope, like Dan, the POI says.)
17. Most importantly, Dan had the opportunity to look into the camera and say, "I didn't abduct Jacob Wetterling. I am innocent. Find the real abductor." Dan didn't do this.

After reading this, Dan will not make the above mistakes on any future interviews.

 

[odyssey1492]

I've watched those videos several times.
His giggling and smirking was bizarrely inappropriate, but there were many more red flags. I'm not an expert in statement analysis, but anyone can find the big red flags in this interview. Here are a few:

1.Dan refuses to mention the words "Jacob's abduction". Instead he refers to Jacob's abduction as as "what was happening at the mailbox" and "the conspiracy".
2. Dan never makes a single reference to Jacob's abductor. Not once. (Why? Because he's the abductor, IMO.)
3. Dan never mentions how Jacob or his family has suffered.
4. Dan never mentions how the real abductor must be found.
5. Dan never mentions how he is furious that the real abductor ruined his life
(Who wouldn't be furious at the monster who ruined their life and was also a child abductor? The answer is someone who brought this investigation upon himself.)
6. Dan isn't angry at the child abductor who ruined his life, but he is very angry at the police for frightening his parents when they came to search the gravel pit.
7. Dan states the worst day of his life was the day LE came to search his gravel pit.
8. He described his parents as scared because LE came to search their property. Dan uses the word 'scared'. The innocent might be annoyed or angry if LE searched our property and took things, but Dan says his parents were scared. His parents suspect that their son, Dan, is guilty, IMO.)
9. His 50 to 60-year-old mom had to be physically held on the ground when the police arrived? (wth? Now THATS scared.) Dan's dad had to be physically restrained by Dan.
10. The Rassiers were told to leave while LE was searching, but Dan HAD to return to the property to get some papers. (Music teachers have important documents that MUST be addressed immediately and can't wait for LE searchers
to leave the property? Dan had to know what the searchers were doing.)
11. When asked why he would keep a box of Jacob Wetterling memorabilia, Dan answered the question with a question. (avoidance) He stated, "Why not? Wouldn't it be weird to let all this be lost in my memory?" BIG RED FLAG
(Dan needs to keep all of his abduction memories vivid (not lost) in his mind. This is precisely why serial killers keep 'trophies'.
12.Dan has lied about not journaling about Jacob.
13. Dan kept a pleading letter from Patty, but refused to call or write her back.(Why keep this letter when he refused to acknowledge her requests? It's part of the trophy collection.)
14. Dan experienced very obvious anxiety when he mentioned having to meet with Patty. Watch as he literally can't keep his bum in his seat at this point in the video.
15. Dan exhibits more inappropriate smirking and giggling when he mentions how he sat down and talked with Jacob's mom at her invitation.
16. At the last opportunity Dan had to demand that LE find the real abductor of the monster that abducted Jacob and ruined his life (actually himself), Dan refuses to do it. Instead, Dan ends his interview with trying to manipulate people into believing that Jacob is alive. (in other words, stop looking for the abductor. Everyone should just have hope, like Dan, the POI says.)
17. Most importantly, Dan had the opportunity to look into the camera and say, "I didn't abduct Jacob Wetterling. I am innocent. Find the real abductor." Dan didn't do this.

These are all valid points, which have been discussed before on these forums. But Dan's parents were much older than 50 or 60 at the time of the 2010 search. That is a minor point, but we should be aware of the facts.

That said, it is unfair to judge anyone based on interview clips without considering all of the other known facts. And it is unfair to profile someone based on an edited television interview. We don't know what he said in the interview that didn't make it on air that might assuage some of the concerns you raised. Your analysis of what made it on TV is fair, but it is seriously flawed because it is based only on clips that made it onto TV.

In fairness, we have to weigh all of the evidence. Dan has never been accused of assaulting or attempting to assault another child -- and he works with kids. Pedophiles, overwhelmingly, have multiple victims. That is a fact. But there is not a hint of any allegations against Dan. Given the light that has been shined on him, it is highly likely that allegations would have surfaced because people usually come forward once someone is accused (and Dan has fairly well been accused in the court of public opinion). There also is not a shred of physical evidence linking him to the crime. His car was searched the day after the crime and his property also was searched within a few days of the crime (blame the police for not searching sooner). He has taken a lie detector test, he has submitted to hypnosis (for whatever that is worth), and most importantly, he has been voluntarily questioned by police multiple times without a lawyer present.

So, while it is fair to critique his odd interviews, language, and mannerisms, it is unfair to assess his guilt or innocence without considering all the facts. To do so without personally questioning the person or without a face-to-face evaluation, based on an edited television interview is pure speculation. But, in reality, all any of us can go on is speculation until the police release more information, which is unlikely to ever happen.

I'm not saying Dan didn't do it. I have no idea. Nobody does except Dan. All I am saying is that we should consider all the facts, and a lot of the facts do not point to Dan.

 

[human]

The reason that we are on this crime site is what?

Unless we know what LE knows, we are stuck analyzing what we get.

LE does not identify suspects that easily because of Atlanta. They are very very very and can I add another very careful using the term "suspect". They use the term "POI" nowadays.

I do not know if he has had adventures with others. He has access to the Abbey at St. John's which is filled with sexual deviants in a very nice closed ,inaccessible society.

There have been young adults who have committed suicide who have been molested.

I believe DR's mother would have been in her late 60's when they came to dig up the farm. I think the info is on People Finder's if anyone wishes to confirm it , although that info is not always accurate either.

As far as judging someone by their behavior, WS is a Crime Site. DR is named a POI by LE with numerous facts we do not have.

The FBI has a whole division that analyzes behavior and makes predictions based on information they gather. People may not like it, but that is how it works.

 

[JerseyJo]

I've watched those videos several times.
His giggling and smirking was bizarrely inappropriate, but there were many more red flags. I'm not an expert in statement analysis, but anyone can find the big red flags in this interview. Here are a few:

1.Dan refuses to mention the words "Jacob's abduction". Instead he refers to Jacob's abduction as as "what was happening at the mailbox" and "the conspiracy".
2. Dan never makes a single reference to Jacob's abductor. Not once. (Why? Because he's the abductor, IMO.)
3. Dan never mentions how Jacob or his family has suffered.
4. Dan never mentions how the real abductor must be found.
5. Dan never mentions how he is furious that the real abductor ruined his life
(Who wouldn't be furious at the monster who ruined their life and was also a child abductor? The answer is someone who brought this investigation upon himself.)
6. Dan isn't angry at the child abductor who ruined his life, but he is very angry at the police for frightening his parents when they came to search the gravel pit.
7. Dan states the worst day of his life was the day LE came to search his gravel pit.
8. He described his parents as scared because LE came to search their property. Dan uses the word 'scared'. The innocent might be annoyed or angry if LE searched our property and took things, but Dan says his parents were scared. His parents suspect that their son, Dan, is guilty, IMO.)
9. His 50 to 60-year-old mom had to be physically held on the ground when the police arrived? (wth? Now THATS scared.) Dan's dad had to be physically restrained by Dan.
10. The Rassiers were told to leave while LE was searching, but Dan HAD to return to the property to get some papers. (Music teachers have important documents that MUST be addressed immediately and can't wait for LE searchers to to leave the property? Dan just had to know what the searchers were doing. He just had to return even though he was told to leave.)
11. When asked why he would keep a box of Jacob Wetterling memorabilia, Dan answered the question with a question. (avoidance) He stated, "Why not? Wouldn't it be weird to let all this be lost in my memory?" BIG RED FLAG
(Dan needs to keep all of his abduction memories vivid (not lost) in his mind. This is precisely why serial killers keep 'trophies'.
12.Dan has lied about not journaling about Jacob.
13. Dan kept a pleading letter from Patty, but refused to call or write her back.(Why keep this letter when he refused to acknowledge her requests? It's part of the trophy collection.)
14. Dan experienced very obvious anxiety when he mentioned having to meet with Patty. Watch as he literally can't keep his bum in his seat at this point in the video.
15. Dan exhibits more inappropriate smirking and giggling when he mentions how he sat down and talked with Jacob's mom at her invitation.
16. At the last opportunity Dan had to demand that LE find the real abductor of the monster that abducted Jacob and ruined his life (actually himself), Dan refuses to do it. Instead, Dan ends his interview with trying to manipulate people into believing that Jacob is alive. (in other words, stop looking for the abductor. Everyone should just have hope, like Dan, the POI says.)
17. Most importantly, Dan had the opportunity to look into the camera and say, "I didn't abduct Jacob Wetterling. I am innocent. Find the real abductor." Dan didn't do this.

After reading this, Dan will not make the above mistakes on any future interviews.

Thank you for sharing your analysis Pensfan, you make many interesting and valid points. At the very least, DR's behavior during the course of this interview is rather odd. As I said earlier, his odd demeanor does not help his cause (if he is in fact innocent).

I too found it very strange that DR never gets angry. I think it would be a very natural reaction to become angry when wrongfully accused.

Dr made one comment in particular that aroused my suspicion the most "Jacob could be alive somewhere, wouldn't that be a dream". Just a gut feeling really.

Of course it would be most helpful to hear the unedited version of this interview.

As many posters have stated before, odd behavior does not necessarily define one's guilt . I waver back and forth about DR, he certainly had the opportunity though.

 

[ELOCsoul]

You have more homework to do on repressed memories, their recovery, and rape victims.

I'm not following you here - I took your original post to mean that you thought Jared should look at pictures of DR and hear his voice now? I wasn't suggesting that he should do so, or that he should recognize DR if he was presented with these today.

What I meant was it would be good for you to catch up on the case a bit, and granted I said it somewhat strongly. Covering old ground I guess, but no harm done.

 

[ELOCsoul]

I've watched those videos several times.
His giggling and smirking was bizarrely inappropriate, but there were many more red flags. I'm not an expert in statement analysis, but anyone can find the big red flags in this interview. Here are a few:

1.Dan refuses to mention the words "Jacob's abduction". Instead he refers to Jacob's abduction as as "what was happening at the mailbox" and "the conspiracy".
2. Dan never makes a single reference to Jacob's abductor. Not once. (Why? Because he's the abductor, IMO.)
3. Dan never mentions how Jacob or his family has suffered.
4. Dan never mentions how the real abductor must be found.
5. Dan never mentions how he is furious that the real abductor ruined his life
(Who wouldn't be furious at the monster who ruined their life and was also a child abductor? The answer is someone who brought this investigation upon himself.)
6. Dan isn't angry at the child abductor who ruined his life, but he is very angry at the police for frightening his parents when they came to search the gravel pit.
7. Dan states the worst day of his life was the day LE came to search his gravel pit.
8. He described his parents as scared because LE came to search their property. Dan uses the word 'scared'. The innocent might be annoyed or angry if LE searched our property and took things, but Dan says his parents were scared. His parents suspect that their son, Dan, is guilty, IMO.)
9. His 50 to 60-year-old mom had to be physically held on the ground when the police arrived? (wth? Now THATS scared.) Dan's dad had to be physically restrained by Dan.
10. The Rassiers were told to leave while LE was searching, but Dan HAD to return to the property to get some papers. (Music teachers have important documents that MUST be addressed immediately and can't wait for LE searchers to to leave the property? Dan just had to know what the searchers were doing. He just had to return even though he was told to leave.)
11. When asked why he would keep a box of Jacob Wetterling memorabilia, Dan answered the question with a question. (avoidance) He stated, "Why not? Wouldn't it be weird to let all this be lost in my memory?" BIG RED FLAG
(Dan needs to keep all of his abduction memories vivid (not lost) in his mind. This is precisely why serial killers keep 'trophies'.
12.Dan has lied about not journaling about Jacob.
13. Dan kept a pleading letter from Patty, but refused to call or write her back.(Why keep this letter when he refused to acknowledge her requests? It's part of the trophy collection.)
14. Dan experienced very obvious anxiety when he mentioned having to meet with Patty. Watch as he literally can't keep his bum in his seat at this point in the video.
15. Dan exhibits more inappropriate smirking and giggling when he mentions how he sat down and talked with Jacob's mom at her invitation.
16. At the last opportunity Dan had to demand that LE find the real abductor of the monster that abducted Jacob and ruined his life (actually himself), Dan refuses to do it. Instead, Dan ends his interview with trying to manipulate people into believing that Jacob is alive. (in other words, stop looking for the abductor. Everyone should just have hope, like Dan, the POI says.)
17. Most importantly, Dan had the opportunity to look into the camera and say, "I didn't abduct Jacob Wetterling. I am innocent. Find the real abductor." Dan didn't do this.

After reading this, Dan will not make the above mistakes on any future interviews.

The points about extra words and statement analysis is quite valid - I've often thought his answers and speech patterns were odd. Yeah, he does avoid specific yet simple and appropriate words and phrases most of us would use.

But, then I again I know people who can never answer a question directly under any circumstances. Maybe he's just one of "those people".

 

[ELOCsoul]

Dan Rassier has to be the only adult on Earth who has ever called the sheriff's office because someone turned around in his long driveway (which looks like a rural road) in the daylight. To make this sheriff's call more bizarre, Dan Rassier was a grown MAN when he called the sheriff and not a frightened child.

The behavior of people almost always follows a pattern. This makes me wonder about other bizarre things Dan Rassier has done to involve the sheriff's department in his life.

Pensfan
verified Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse

Where did you get this information about him calling because of the car? I've not come across that information other than the form of conjecture. DR's record with the state of MN is clean according to public records website.

 

[human]

I think what Pensfan means is that Pen is wondering if DR has called or interacted with police in the past.

Has he called police about lovers in his lane, for instance.

Or has he called police about other issues.

I do not know where it is, but I was always under the impression he called about a car.

 

[Pensfan]

Where did you get this information about him calling because of the car? I've not come across that information other than the form of conjecture. DR's record with the state of MN is clean according to public records website.

The information about Dan ridiculously calling law enforcement about a car driving down his long driveway which looks like a rural road is here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1102/28/ng.01.html

 

[ELOCsoul]

The information about Dan ridiculously calling law enforcement about a car driving down his long driveway which looks like a rural road is here:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1102/28/ng.01.html

Ok, I have read that transcript before. While I do agree with you that what is stated here would properly be interpreted the way you suggest, the source of the statement fall short of reliably accurate. It says he reported a car turning around in his driveway when he called police. It doesn't say if that's the reason he called, or just part of the info he gave when he called. The source is Natisha Lance, the producer of the Nancy Grace show. She may have been paraphrasing from media reports. We do know that DR reported a car in the driveway back in 1989 - we just don't know what he actually said when he called 911.

 

[SpringThyme]

After reading the article Joy posted about child abductors based on FBI research, it seems socially functional pedophiles usually don't abduct children because they find other ways to obtain access to them. These are the pastors, priests, teachers who fool everyone. Socially isolated pedophiles who are without access and ability to manipulate kids abduct them as a way to satisfy their urges because it is their only option. These are the unemployed weirdo types that fly under the radar. Sadistic psychopaths will target children because of their desire to inflict pain on them. They are violent, conniving serial predators, like Ted Bundy.

Child abductors abduct because they have to in order to have contact with kids or because they need to get them away to torture them.

IMO, DR doesn't seem to fit the first two types. He has plenty of access to kids and must be able to manage them well enough to teach. He may not function the best socially, but its adequate. Lets face it, kids are not that hard to manipulate. He also can hold a job. No kid, parent, or teacher has come forward at all with an accusation. I'm guessing no child *advertiser censored* was found either because that would be huge leverage for LE.

If he is the third type he would likely have a long trail of victims. Maybe not locally as I understand he does run marathons all over the country, but usually this is a compulsion only prison or death stops, unless some other substitute is found. They need someone to abuse. This is the classic mask of sanity scenario. One would also expect some early history of violence and thrill seeking, a sense of superiority, rule-breaking, problems with authority, acting out, perhaps animal torture, bed wetting, fire starting. Now maybe in a small community this all has been brushed under the carpet, who knows. Maybe he's a John Wayne Gacy type. Usually these kind of people, especially the ones who get away with it for a long time, are smooth on the surface.

I think another possibility is that DR has Aspergers. http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/mental-health-aspergers-syndrome

He indeed may not function well in the adult world of subtlety and nuance. He would lack the soft skills of relationships, making dating really hard. He will seem odd, have limited obsessions. He might very well sit around all day organizing his record collection. It's common to have a specific talent, such as music. He may answer questions in a literal way and not consider how he might be perceived, such as "I think someone might hide a body here," not understanding that would create suspicion. Speech patterns and mannerisms can be unusual. He would find it hard to fully appreciate another person's subjective experience and say things unintentionally that come across as insensitive and strange. People with this disorder can hold jobs and can be successful if the job coincides with their specific talent or interest, especially with family support. They like and need routines. Not sure how this mixes with teaching, but I think it would be possible, especially with the focus on music, individual or small group instruction. He would also have dependable, predictable ways to interact with peers, such as talking about the weather, the Twins, etc or especially music and running. Planning and executing violent crimes would be pretty unlikely, as these folks unravel under intense emotion. So maybe he's an odd duck at the wrong place and the wrong time.

 

[human]

Could be. But the statstics Joy lists are numbers such a s 60%. That means 40 % are something else.

I wonder how many musicians have Asperger's as sensitivity to noise is an issue.

Also, people with Asperger's have a high need for predictability and order. Those are things that are not available in the classroom where there is constant change and children with needs and issues.

Organizing a music collection could be OCD.

The latest person with whom I am intrigued is Jodi Arias who gives very inappropriate answers and has very inappropriate emotional responses

 

[human]

As far as pedos go, they do not like to harm their victims. But as time goes on, they must as they do not want to get caught.

We do not know if DR took Jacob as a joke that went horribly wrong.

He claims that he is a jokester. I wonder what kind of jokes he plays.