MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #9

[Sasquatch321]

Trevor did also mention "something kind of hanging down in the back" in one of his other interviews. I'll look for the link tomorrow.

This is another glaring problem in the case. We need all the real details put into one article so that people completely understand it. How bad does the public and LE want to solve this case?

 

[Jbrown324320]

This article I found has interesting connections between Jodi Huisentruit and Jacob.

http://www.findjodi.com/jodi-huisentruit-and-jacob-wetterling-two-families-wait-for-answers/

 

[FindTim]

I would assume any and all blood samples have been tested and have ruled out that it was Jacob's blood. I think it's safe to say that it's not Jacob's blood, and that any and all references to the "bloody trunk" can be omitted.

DR stated that the trunk had blood on it, did he not? We have no idea how much blood.

How was the blood found ? Is it cadaver blood? If so, how did cadaver blood get on a trunk?

Cadaver dogs do not hit on blood unless it would be cadaver blood. Perhaps there is not enough information at this point to identify the blood. DNA had just started being used in 1989, so up until that point, all of those years prior, that technology did not exist. So, this might be a case of waiting for more technology to ID things in blood that are not available at this point.

Think about it. Would anyone notice or wonder what a drop of blood is on a trunk? It could be anything. Paint, ink, dirt, etc. DR said it was blood. LE has not said that they took the trunk because of blood,have they?

As far as the dirt, they sifted it. If you read the first article posted by Bessie, you see that they found a bone fragment that has no DNA in a case that was being examined.

They could have siftings of who knows what from that fire pit.

Once again, DR brought up animals being burned in the pit. We don't know if they found bone fragments in the pit. We do know from Bessie's articles that the dogs don't hit on animal remains.

It is ludicrous, to me, to think that DR would be identified 25 years later as POI because LE has no one else. Maybe they could have DAH or Bah----'s.

But instead they chose an upstanding citizen whose family is well regarded and distinguished . There is a reason.

 

[Wisdom]

Has a source been cited for DR claiming blood in the trunk? I have yet to see it.

You can hear it directly from the horses mouth by watching this video. Pay close attention from about 4:40 remaining in the video.

http://greaterminnesota.kstp.com/news/news/56198-web-exclusive-interview-jacob-wetterling-person-interest

 

[FindTim]

"I then saw a long, dark, old green car (possibly brown) with an off white roof. It was driving around the block over and over. It was one of those old cars with a REALLY long hood." http://www.joybaker.com/2014/06/22/another-incident-and-some-exciting-news/

“I’m convinced 100 percent whoever was driving that afternoon car…you have your kidnapper. No one drives like that in broad daylight,” Rassier said. “That is what I told police from the beginning.” http://www.joybaker.com/2013/05/15/dans-story-covered-on-wcco-news/

Monte Carlo's have long hoods. Both reports talk about a tan/brown car.

Wow! This sounds almost like a dead ringer for what DR saw the day Jacob was abducted.

 

[Wisdom]

I would assume any and all blood samples have been tested and have ruled out that it was Jacob's blood. I think it's safe to say that it's not Jacob's blood, and that any and all references to the "bloody trunk" can be omitted.

I've seen a few posts regarding the "bloody trunk" and quite frankly laugh each time I've seen people take offense to it. We have a trunk with confirmed blood on it so it's a BLOODY TRUNK. verreaction:

 

[bessie]

You can hear it directly from the horses mouth by watching this video. Pay close attention from about 4:40 remaining in the video.

http://greaterminnesota.kstp.com/ne...ve-interview-jacob-wetterling-person-interest

4:40-3:52

DR: They apparently saw some sort of remnants of...blood or something. I don't know all of the technical jargon for their testing and that type of thing, but uh, there was one item that was gotten from...like a...onto something... She got it from somewhere else. We don't know where it really came from...but it showed some sort of... some uh, blood residue or whatever. But since it was in the house, they felt that uh, they needed to go in the house. And that's how they got their warrant to go in the house.

Reporter: That was a cedar chest?

DR: Right, a chest that used to be in the house for clothing and that type of thing. So...

http://greaterminnesota.kstp.com/ne...ve-interview-jacob-wetterling-person-interest

 

[FindTim]

And has LE released any information what they collected? If it was Jacob's it would have been the biggest news in the case.

4:40-3:52
http://greaterminnesota.kstp.com/ne...ve-interview-jacob-wetterling-person-interest

 

[Wisdom]

“I’m convinced 100 percent whoever was driving that afternoon car…you have your kidnapper. No one drives like that in broad daylight,” Rassier said. “That is what I told police from the beginning.”

http://www.joybaker.com/2013/05/15/dans-story-covered-on-wcco-news/

Monte Carlo's have long hoods. Both reports talk about a tan/brown car.

Wow! This sounds almost like a dead ringer for what DR saw the day Jacob was abducted.

This statement you quoted by DR is one of the biggest head scratchers to leave his mouth to date. Why on earth would he be convinced that if you found the person driving that afternoon car that you would have your kidnapper from later on that night??? Makes absolutely no sense at all given the remote location and the boys themselves had no idea of their plans that night until the last minute.

 

[HEY YOU!]

"I then saw a long, dark, old green car (possibly brown) with an off white roof. It was driving around the block over and over. It was one of those old cars with a REALLY long hood." http://www.joybaker.com/2014/06/22/another-incident-and-some-exciting-news/

“I’m convinced 100 percent whoever was driving that afternoon car…you have your kidnapper. No one drives like that in broad daylight,” Rassier said. “That is what I told police from the beginning.” http://www.joybaker.com/2013/05/15/dans-story-covered-on-wcco-news/

Monte Carlo's have long hoods. Both reports talk about a tan/brown car.

Wow! This sounds almost like a dead ringer for what DR saw the day Jacob was abducted.

Rassier also told Wetterling where he thought a body could be hidden on his property.

“The person in the area who probably did this could have taken Jacob’s body and hidden it in our gravel pit,” Rassier told Patty Wetterling.

Which is it? He was spirited away in a brown Monte Carlo (that only he saw) or the abductor killed Jacob on DR property and buried him?

Who would drive like a maniac up DR driveway during the day and then return at night with no car and abduct a kid who had never, ever been out at night without an adult? So the maniac in the Monte Carlo just continued about his day and returned (for what reason, no kids at DR house) to abduct a random kid who had never been past that driveway at that hour of the night. Who would know that Jacob, Trevor & Aaron would be passing by at that time of night? Nobody, except whoever saw them on the road.

<modsnip>

 

[FindTim]

Since this board is FULL of hypotheticals, why wouldn't this make sense? Perhaps the kidnapper saw the boys earlier in day and wanted to get their vehicle turned around quickly or hidden quickly, hence speeding up the driveway and driving chaotically.

DR has every reason to speculate as to why he thinks that could be the kidnapper. For dozens of years he lived there and had NEVER witnessed anything like that. So for that to happen the same day I totally understand where he's coming from.

This statement you quoted by DR is one of the biggest head scratchers to leave his mouth to date. Why on earth would he be convinced that if you found the person driving that afternoon car that you would have your kidnapper from later on that night??? Makes absolutely no sense at all given the remote location and the boys themselves had no idea of their plans that night until the last minute.

 

[Wisdom]

This article I found has interesting connections between Jodi Huisentruit and Jacob.

http://www.findjodi.com/jodi-huisentruit-and-jacob-wetterling-two-families-wait-for-answers/

Jodi's abduction happened about 15 minutes from where I grew up at the time and is another case I would love to see solved. I knew the private investigator that looked into Jodi's case and he has since passed. The two cases are not related other than the points mentioned in the article in my opinion. Her case has about 3 strong potential suspects and the main POI was much older than her and was obsessed with her.

 

[Trino]

I've seen a few posts regarding the "bloody trunk" and quite frankly laugh each time I've seen people take offense to it. We have a trunk with confirmed blood on it so it's a BLOODY TRUNK. verreaction:

I think my previous posts have stated my feelings. First, a trunk is usually something that is/was used for transportation. It was a chest. Secondly, bloody indicated massive amounts of blood. We don't know that at all. All we know was blood residue was found; that could be a drop.

 

[Shay]

Since this board is FULL of hypotheticals, why wouldn't this make sense? Perhaps the kidnapper saw the boys earlier in day and wanted to get their vehicle turned around quickly or hidden quickly, hence speeding up the driveway and driving chaotically.

DR has every reason to speculate as to why he thinks that could be the kidnapper. For dozens of years he lived there and had NEVER witnessed anything like that. So for that to happen the same day I totally understand where he's coming from.

Another car came speeding into the yard and turned around right about the time of the abduction, according to DR. I wonder why DR didn't insist THAT person was the kidnapper...makes more sense!

 

[ELOCsoul]

Rassier also told Wetterling where he thought a body could be hidden on his property.

“The person in the area who probably did this could have taken Jacob’s body and hidden it in our gravel pit,” Rassier told Patty Wetterling.

Which is it? He was spirited away in a brown Monte Carlo (that only he saw) or the abductor killed Jacob on DR property and buried him?

Who would drive like a maniac up DR driveway during the day and then return at night with no car and abduct a kid who had never, ever been out at night without an adult? So the maniac in the Monte Carlo just continued about his day and returned (for what reason, no kids at DR house) to abduct a random kid who had never been past that driveway at that hour of the night. Who would know that Jacob, Trevor & Aaron would be passing by at that time of night? Nobody, except whoever saw them on the road.

<modsnip>

I think we get your point, but in fairness I think the two comments by DR were in different contexts.

 

[ELOCsoul]

I think my previous posts have stated my feelings. First, a trunk is usually something that is/was used for transportation. It was a chest. Secondly, bloody indicated massive amounts of blood. We don't know that at all. All we know was blood residue was found; that could be a drop.

This post by Trino says it best. Being bloody, and containing blood are dramatically different in terms of perception.

Please, everyone, no more debating the subject.

 

[Wisdom]

I think my previous posts have stated my feelings. First, a trunk is usually something that is/was used for transportation. It was a chest. Secondly, bloody indicated massive amounts of blood. We don't know that at all. All we know was blood residue was found; that could be a drop.

Point taken. It was a chest with blood on it so it's now a "bloody chest". Even if a mosquito was slapped on the chest with a single drop of blood.... I'm still calling it a bloody chest.

 

[ELOCsoul]

And has LE released any information what they collected? If it was Jacob's it would have been the biggest news in the case.

Fair enough. But, on the other hand.....why haven't they given it all back to DR???

 

[HEY YOU!]

Since this board is FULL of hypotheticals, why wouldn't this make sense? Perhaps the kidnapper saw the boys earlier in day and wanted to get their vehicle turned around quickly or hidden quickly, hence speeding up the driveway and driving chaotically.

DR has every reason to speculate as to why he thinks that could be the kidnapper. For dozens of years he lived there and had NEVER witnessed anything like that. So for that to happen the same day I totally understand where he's coming from.

DR 'said' he saw a car speeding up his driveway that day. He also saw a blue car with a small woman or child turning around in his driveway at around the time of the abduction. The tire tracks prove that he was not telling the truth. Why would DR make up a story about random cars driving up his driveway the same day/night a boy is abducted? Why?

If a would be kidnapper saw the boys earlier in the day, why would he pick somebody's driveway to hide in not knowing who lived there and may come down the driveway at any time? What would make a kidnapper think these boys would be back that night? That is a real stretch and a huge risk. what, did the kidnapper sit in DR's driveway for hours waiting and hoping? How did that person transport Jacob if not by car?

 

[cGorg]

As far as this being old news, new people come on WS all of the time and ask questions. There is so much on these threads so most new people would have a difficult time reading for hours.

It is good to get information , I feel, reviewed as people have different insights.

Sher has several times brought out the info about the blood. People still,have not seen it . It is good to review

You're right. Sorry to be curmudgeonly.