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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, that I can relate to. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. The problem however, is that it must no simpler than what is necessary to explain the evidence. I didn't want two perps, but the evidence, imho, required me to add that complexity to explain the evidence. I spent a few pages developing that, but its the discussion on the tire tracks and it is impossible to get that with one person, imo.

So, point well taken.

~ svh


One thing that stands out to me in this scenario is the word "prank" and "joke". We've heard it:
*from PW (via DR)
*from DR describing himself in the KARE interview ("...and you know me, I like to joke around")
*and from Aaron in describing the initial encounter "We thought it was a joke"
 
It's not fact that Paynesville, cold spring, and Wetterling cases are interlinked. The Hubers have been mostly tied to the Paynesville and Cold Spring cases. It is very unlikely they are actually involved in any of them. We've looked at them too long, they would have slipped by now or been identified by Jared.

There's at least 1 Paynesville victim that identified a dark blue parka with an orange liner and now recently a Huber neighbor (BJ) on camera stating he saw both Delbert + Harvey wearing this same coat. It doesn't connect them to Jacob's case but IMO is a definite connection to the Paynesville cases.
 
Sigrun, I'm catching up a but a question about your process: At this point, does K+K exist or not? If they do/not will that be something you must also analyze for best fit here?

Now that is a cool question!! A Best Fit starts off with odds related to individual pieces of evidence; the pieces used to create narratives. And they are the odds that that piece has probative value. It's weak at first, then you keep building this body of evidence until you're done with all of it and can create the main narrative. This larger narrative builds fast when you have all the parts. If the odds that a Grand Prix (or shall we say a car driven by K+K) could have been in that driveway continue to go down as other contrary odds go up, then it is like asking which is more likely; that Bugs Bunny is taller than I am or shorter? The answer is that it doesn't matter because Bugs Bunny doesn't exist. K+K could and can still exist, and they could still be the culprits (though the odds of this are dropping) but if their odds of involvement are low enough, we can treat them as if they don't exist for our purposes. Do they really exist as far as I know now? I really don't have to worry about that at all, because it might not ever be necessary to answer that directly. I just need to know it is less likely than some other contrary narrative.

It's not used in criminology but in intelligence analysis and the goal is a little different but very similar. You're looking for what is the most likely explanation of an event when the core information available to you is limited.

~ svh
 
There's at least 1 Paynesville victim that identified a dark blue parka with an orange liner and now recently a Huber neighbor (BJ) on camera stating he saw both Delbert + Harvey wearing this same coat. It doesn't connect them to Jacob's case but IMO is a definite connection to the Paynesville cases.
<rsbm>

cGorg, do you have a link for the bolded part? Or can you at least direct me to where the neighbor's statement was reported?

Thanks!

ETA: I found it.
And Jones said he immediately recognized a photo of a vintage 1970s-era blue parka with an orange lining posted by Joy Baker, a local blogger who first uncovered the unsolved Paynesvlle assaults. The coat was described by at least one of the Paynesville victims. Jones said he saw both Delbert and Harvey wear a parka like that.

And Jones remembers Delbert Huber&#8217;s voice.

&#8220;Very raspy, deeper, raspy voice,&#8221; Jones said.
http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2014/05/23/neighbors-discuss-father-son-wetterling-abduction/
 
Excellent question! :thumb:


Has anyone answered it?

Scary isn't it? him having such a connection to DR and being a known pedophile. Did DR and LH have a reunion while mom and dad were gone? The only argument is that LE has accounted for all of the tire tracks. He's sure making himself safe by staying out of the country.
 
One thing that stands out to me in this scenario is the word "prank" and "joke". We've heard it:
*from PW (via DR)
*from DR describing himself in the KARE interview ("...and you know me, I like to joke around")
*and from Aaron in describing the initial encounter "We thought it was a joke"

Sounds like you might be alluding to a deeper point? If a ruse or prank Occam's Razor has to be applied very deftly. There should be an indicator somewhere though this is occurring, imo. Do you see some here?

~ svh
 
That would only apply if the two cases were done by the same perp and I seriously don't think they were. I believe all the suspect sketches / misc info from Jared's case are part of what damaged Jacob's case from the beginning. Everyone trying to find Jacob was looking for the person(s) in those famous sketches and Jacob's abductor wore a black nylon mask and his abductors voice has NEVER been described as being deep or raspy. It was described as sounding like he had a cold.

:goodpost:
 
Excellent question! :thumb:


Has anyone answered it?

according to this court case, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19951248893P2d355_11247 LH was arrested May of 1991 in Utah and extradited to Nevada for molesting a 12-13 year old boy. in the link where it showed the family letter, he says he was having a "band reunion" in Illinois in the spring of 2011. Not sure how often they have the reunions and if they were with DR.
http://theditchrider.weebly.com/robert.html also went to Peru according to the link. I believe August of 2010.
 
Now that is a cool question!! A Best Fit starts off with odds related to individual pieces of evidence; the pieces used to create narratives. And they are the odds that that piece has probative value. It's weak at first, then you keep building this body of evidence until you're done with all of it and can create the main narrative. This larger narrative builds fast when you have all the parts. If the odds that a Grand Prix (or shall we say a car driven by K+K) could have been in that driveway continue to go down as other contrary odds go up, then it is like asking which is more likely; that Bugs Bunny is taller than I am or shorter? The answer is that it doesn't matter because Bugs Bunny doesn't exist. K+K could and can still exist, and they could still be the culprits (though the odds of this are dropping) but if their odds of involvement are low enough, we can treat them as if they don't exist for our purposes. Do they really exist as far as I know now? I really don't have to worry about that at all, because it might not ever be necessary to answer that directly. I just need to know it is less likely than some other contrary narrative.

It's not used in criminology but in intelligence analysis and the goal is a little different but very similar. You're looking for what is the most likely explanation of an event when the core information available to you is limited.

~ svh

Oh wow, that's pretty cool. Makes sense. (and thanks for reminding me why I didn't become a doctor: MATH! That portion of logic continues to challenge me! But I'm seeing it's application here....grrrrr)
 
according to this court case, http://www.leagle.com/decision/19951248893P2d355_11247 LH was arrested May of 1991 in Utah and extradited to Nevada for molesting a 12-13 year old boy. in the link where it showed the family letter, he says he was having a "band reunion" in Illinois in the spring of 2011. Not sure how often they have the reunions and if they were with DR.
http://theditchrider.weebly.com/robert.html also went to Peru according to the link. I believe August of 2010.
Thanks for the links, but how does this relate to October 22, 1989?
 
Excellent question! :thumb:


Has anyone answered it?

Was I in the vicinity of a unsolved murder when it happened? That's why it's called "unsolved". By definition you can't answer it.

~ svh
 
Sounds like you might be alluding to a deeper point? If a ruse or prank Occam's Razor has to be applied very deftly. There should be an indicator somewhere though this is occurring, imo. Do you see some here?

~ svh

Going with today's theoretical developments, I see it as evidentiary in possibly explaining what I'll call "spontaneous premeditation".
I'll think on it...
 
At WS, TOS requires that speculation be based on fact, which means linking information to an accepted and credible source. In almost all cases that means mainstream media reporting (MSM) and/or direct statements from LE. Any exceptions must be approved by the point moderator. (Hearsay and rumors don't cut it.) Once that requirement is met, speculation and brainstorming can take place. Keep in mind, it's very important that we make it clear we are stating opinions. IMO, JMO, and MOO work well for that purpose. The last thing we want to do is cause confusion or spur rumors by misrepresenting speculation as the truth.

Rules are put in place to protect people from harassment. Some may object to rules on the basis of free speech. Often, those that lean on the wall of free speech fail to recognize that the limits of free speech are where the swing extends past the nose of others. When we get to that point, we've gone out of bounds, rules or no rules.
 
Going with today's theoretical developments, I see it as evidentiary in possibly explaining what I'll call "spontaneous premeditation".
I'll think on it...

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on that

~ svh
 
One thing that stands out to me in this scenario is the word "prank" and "joke". We've heard it:
*from PW (via DR)
*from DR describing himself in the KARE interview ("...and you know me, I like to joke around")
*and from Aaron in describing the initial encounter "We thought it was a joke"

I used to think it was possible to have been a prank as well. But, having dug deeper and learning more, I am certain it was not a prank. The man took Jacob for sexual purposes IMO
 
Was I in the vicinity of a unsolved murder when it happened? That's why it's called "unsolved". By definition you can't answer it.

~ svh
All questions can be answered. And it would make this current line of discussion worth the effort if we could first solve the question of LH's whereabouts, IMO.
 
I used to think it was possible to have been a prank as well. But, having dug deeper and learning more, I am certain it was not a prank. The man took Jacob for sexual purposes IMO

ELOCsoul, by prank or joke, I don't mean what you (I'm assuming you're of healthy mind) or I (I'm usually of sound mind ;) would consider a prank.
If I'm understanding Sigrun's process, they're trying to explain something very difficult for you and me to comprehend (which is not to say Sigrun is not of sound mind...Sigrun is just acting as a translator of sorts, imo. I'm sure Sigrund will explain further if that's where they end up going)
So, in this regard, the "prankster" in his convoluted mind(s), justifies taking Jacob as a joke but absolutely for sexual purposes.
 
Thanks for the links, but how does this relate to October 22, 1989?

I believe the first band reunion was held in 1989. I am waiting on an email to confirm this and the date. Maybe he was in Ill and decided to pop in for a visit.
 
ELOCsoul, by prank or joke, I don't mean what you (I'm assuming you're of healthy mind) or I (I'm usually of sound mind ;) would consider a prank.
If I'm understanding Sigrun's process, they're trying to explain something very difficult for you and me to comprehend (which is not to say Sigrun is not of sound mind...Sigrun is just acting as a translator of sorts, imo. I'm sure Sigrund will explain further if that's where they end up going)
So, in this regard, the "prankster" in his convoluted mind(s), justifies taking Jacob as a joke but absolutely for sexual purposes.

This is an interesting question about the meaning of words, in this case, the word &#8220;prank&#8221;. Since what we are dealing with here is an Axis II NPD I&#8217;ll explain it in those terms. I&#8217;ve mentioned before some of the feature sets of NPD and described how they present. I noted that NPD&#8217;s have a limited range of emotion and often only feel anger. But there is one other emotion they feel that runs very, very deep and it the hardest to study and diagnose clinically. But if you&#8217;re familiarity with them is good, you will know about this. I call it &#8220;comic-lust&#8221;. This goes to the question about playing jokes on people. When an NPD is forced to live in a &#8220;civilized&#8221; society it is a major, major task to stay within boundaries most of us don&#8217;t even think about. This means that whenever they are in an uncontrolled environment, or can create one without cost to themselves, there is a euphoric release of these constraints. It&#8217;s like the giddiness and excitement of going out on a first date, or thrill seeking as my grandparents called it, but 1000 times stronger. This is bad Feng Shui. One of the things NPDs value so much is their freedom from these other emotions (when it serves them &#8211; sadly, they generally never comprehend the magnitude of the good they are missing completely). So self-serving, base, characteristically narcissistic behavior emerges, sometimes explosively on a crime scene, where the sufferer is in an impassioned frenzy, just like that first date 1000 times over, and this includes enjoying the suffering of others. This is the proverbial, tired meme of lack of empathy coming forth violently to give the sufferer the &#8220;room&#8221; to let their boundaries fly apart, to let their disorder express without inhibition. And oddly, when this happens, the sufferer can feel an undercurrent of anger as well, anger at those that constrained them (pretty much everyone). So how does all this manifest? This giddiness of a first date mixed with a dab of anger is what I call comic-lust. Comic-lust is experiencing great humor and excitement in the suffering of others.

When a man accused of murdering your daughter invites you over to plead his innocence with you, then surreptitiously guides you over the floor where your daughter is buried, he is getting a sick kick out of this, having you walk on her grave and not knowing it. It is hilarious to him precisely because he knows how painful it would be to you to find out. It&#8217;s your pain that humors. When a natural born NPD helps a suffering family try to resolve what happened to their missing child, he injects bits of truth in a false narrative in order to &#8220;tell you to your face&#8221; they killed your child and to then laugh about that. Because again, they know you would be hurt if you found out. And they can&#8217;t help it. Like robots they consistently, reliably do this kind of stuff. And once you&#8217;ve been around it a long time, or been very close to it, you pick up on these cues and tells and can see it where the &#8220;normal&#8221; population thinks nothing at all. So, a cruel joke or prank might be to tell the public exactly what car JEW left in, and to even describe seeing him drive out of his own driveway, for a sick punch of laughter. And it&#8217;s like lust. It runs deep and powerful and can be felt for days or even years after the fact. It&#8217;s a strange combination of anger, comedy and lust that makes the true naturals do things like take keepsakes from crime scenes, taunt police, mutilate remains for no reason, etc. And it really gets scary when you realize that almost all of those personality features seen in disorders actually derive of just one core being; comic-lust.

So, on a crime scene, you look for that engineered contrivance that sticks out as conspicuously hurtful to someone, either physically or in an abstract, emotional way, but not in an obvious way, such as by the crime itself. And if it is a prank gone wrong, you look for that same conspicuous harm engineered in some way to be made harmless, but which in the case of the crime presenting, became harmful instead. The asking of ages of the boys was conspicuous comic-lust, even if I assume in this latter narrative I&#8217;ve reached that this might have actually been a specific request by S2 made of S1. Either way, it has the same origin. It&#8217;s comic-lust and that is why it makes no sense to you. You don&#8217;t have even the smallest measure of comic-lust. It is alien to you.

So, finally, back to the word &#8220;prank&#8221;. We all know what it means, but what happens when the mark of the con is the object of comic-lust? This is something sadistic and aberrant, but it can still take on all the appearance and manner of a prank. It is the same for all intents and purposes, it&#8217;s just that the design of the prank, when designed by an Axis II, conveys a comic-lust. When designed by any other person, there will be no indication in the evidence of the deliberate, reckless risk of immense suffering of another person for someone else&#8217;s gratification.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
150
Guests online
2,313
Total visitors
2,463

Forum statistics

Threads
602,361
Messages
18,139,687
Members
231,368
Latest member
Elle C
Back
Top