MN MN - Joshua Guimond, 20, Collegeville, 9 Nov 2002 - #2

[formerpolicestaff]

Regarding my going back to basics theory. How sure are we that Wollmering had nothing to do with Josh's disappearance? I can't seem to shake his murder demise (I have a very interesting theory on this, which I may post up soon).

Do we think Wollmering would have any motive? Interested to hear thoughts on this.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Ok, this is my 2nd theory - and it's going to be a bit of an "out there" theory, although it's still extremely possible to have happened. It's not a complete theory like my first, because there's still some missing parts which I'm not certain of unless I looked at Josh's computer and the university servers.

My first theory was that Josh never made it out of the poker party. I still believe that's a very, very possible theory. I arrived at that conclusion because I initially discounted 2 things: monks and sightings. Why? Because if you read my previous post, you'll see that the sightings are almost just as bizarre as the disappearance, and the poker party stories were all over the place and I still find it somewhat difficult to believe Josh left the party. I stand by that theory being very possible, but want to throw another one out there, because I've seen some "strange" things that have never been discussed.

Disclaimer & forewarning: it gets dark, fast. So reader discretion is advised. Here goes.

Theory #2 Part #1 - Abduction by Monk(s)

Nick and Josh's family both said that Josh was writing a paper regarding abuse at the monastery (Source: Netflix Documentary). Unfortunately, I'm unable to confirm this, but saw a post that said:

"Josh’s thesis was missing from his computer. He was working on a paper regarding the Catholic sex abuse scandal. The family stated that Josh was upset about two priests accused of sex abuse being transferred to the church in the Bahamas. He felt they should have been prosecuted by the law instead of SJSU handling the situation themselves. The thesis was saved on St John’s computer server which can be accessed by anyone in the IT department at the school. SOMEONE DIDN’T WANT JOSH’S THESIS PAPER ABOUT PRIEST SEX ABUSE TO BECOME PUBLIC. Police failed to interview the head of the tech server. FAIL!" (Source: here).

In my expert view (digital forensics expert) it's extremely likely that whomever had access to the servers within the university would be able to view documents students had saved. So if Josh did indeed have anything on the monks, and saved it publicly on the server at St. Johns, other(s) could have viewed it.

Likely Abduction Site

Now, couple this with what I posted previously:

If we are to believe the sightings, then we know that Josh's (witnessed) route was the yellow line from Metten Court (bottom right) to the intersection. This means that Josh was very likely taken from the area in the blue circle.

The Abductor (Theory)

Now, it's important to note, that:

On April 28, 2003 — five months after Josh’s disappearance — the Stearns County Sheriff’s Department released information that it “received a call from an individual stating that they were driving off campus, just after midnight, on the night Joshua Guimond disappeared and that they saw someone jogging towards campus on County Road 159 wearing bright colored jogging clothing.”

Who was the jogger? Wollmering was a known jogger. And - Wollmering was a prolific abuser, and credibly accused monk. What makes this more interesting? Bruce Wolmering was one of the over-watchers of the dorm that held the party (Metten Court). So if Josh was witnessed walking past the dumpsters behind Metten Court at 11:57pm, and the "jogger" was running towards campus "just after midnight" - this is very likely the person that is responsible for Josh's disappearance.

Now, I go back to the profile from the former FBI-profiler:

The offender likely would have rehearsed his abduction plan. This means that in the months prior to his victim’s disappearance, he used a con or ruse (e.g., asking for assistance or directions, feigning a fall, accident, or injury) to lure a student late at night into a vehicle, to an isolated area concealed from public view, or to an indoor location over which he had a great deal of control (e.g., a basement, garage, or office area).

Therefore, it's possible that Wollmering followed Josh (and was witnessed jogging towards campus in the process).

Now, you're probably thinking: Ok, sounds possible. But I've heard this before. I decided to dig a little bit deeper. I've uncovered some interesting things that I think we should consider.

1) Wollmering was not just a keen jogger, but he was even a cross-country/track coach from 1967 to 1969 (see attached file) Further source: Father Bruce Wollmering, OSB — Saint John's Abbey
2) Wollmering died under the most bizarre circumstances ever

Exploring Wollmering's Death

St John's claim: Father Bruce was active and healthy until the sudden medical incident that took his life. He had collapsed in the basement locker room of the monastery. Loss of much blood caused cardiac arrest. Source: Father Bruce Wollmering, OSB — Saint John's Abbey

According to Shawn Vierzba from St. John’s Life Safety, in a call to the Stearns County Sheriff’s Office/Dispatch Center at 6:08pm on February 4, 2009: “One of our monks ah passed away. He fell or we believe he fell but ah there’s some trauma.”

According to Br. David Klingeman from St. John’s Abbey on September 20, 2010:

“While going down a hallway, Fr. Bruce started having a severe nose bleed (he had been having them of late). He went to the locker room and to the sink to contain the bleeding. Next he probably turned to perhaps go to the health center before it closed and tripped over the bench directly behind the sinks and hit his head on a locker. It is believed that he got up several times and fell again on the concrete floor since there was now a great deal of blood lost. Bruce was found about 10 minutes after the fall unconscious. The EMT and ambulance were called and CPR was performed. I believe from the fall he had cracked his skull and a rib punctured his lung thus causing the massive blood loss.”

(P.S - I do not believe Wollmering died accidentally. This was a murder. 100% guaranteed. A cracked rib puncturing a lung which leads to blood loss and cardiac arrest is one thing - but a cracked skull that has been hit several times on the sink and concrete floor. Wollmering had been violently brutally murdered, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever).

Note: Br. Klingeman did not respond when he was asked if Wollmering was hiding anything or if Klingeman knew of anyone who wanted to hurt Wollmering.

When Wollmering died, his room in the monastery was reportedly taped off and searched by law enforcement - computer equipment seized.

Source for the above: Behindthepinecurtain.

Now read what is quite possibly, the most strange and bizarre obituary comment I've ever read in my life (and trust me, I've read hundreds, maybe thousands). I've attached the file to the post - top right of the picture you can read:

"I don't think Bruce ever imagined becoming an elderly monk. He said more than once that he prayed that God would take him quickly when the time came. At the same time, I don't think Bruce ever imagined dying in this particular way. But he would have had little patience with the year by year diminishments that are part of growing old... All of us will miss his outgoing energy and care." - Abbot John Klassen

To me, this is the most strange, bizarre and quite frankly scary comment I've read in an obituary. I don't want to jump to conclusions, but it sounds to me as if Abbot Josh Klassen is saying it was a blessing he died like this rather than growing old.

Personally, I believe Wollmering died by being pushed multiple times - this wouldn't leave any "blunt force trauma" but it would cause the injuries he sustained.

End of Theory #2 Part #1/2.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Theory #2 Part #2 - Abduction by Monk(s)
Wollmering was almost certainly gay. At least, he had an attraction to boys/men (Source: St. John's publicly released files).

Following the FBI profile (2003) (Source) - Abbot Klassen was worried that it fit Bruce Wollmering. In 2004 Abbot Klassen refused to release Father Bruce Wollmering’s name to the public because of the effect that such an announcement would have on fund raising and enrollment. Klassen, who is also Saint John’s University’s chancellor, was worried that Father Wollmering would be connected to the disappearance of Joshua Guimond, a student at Saint John’s. While Abbot Klassen kept Father Wollmering’s name from the public, Wollmering reoffended (Source: BehindThePineCurtain).

This is all available online and from behind the pine curtain. You can go and read it all. So I decided to go and take a good look at who/what/where people were in 2002 and after 2009 when Wollmering was murdered passed away.

Sometimes, in truly bizarre cases like this, you have to look at who gains what - did anyone experience change after few years within the Abbey? Did anyone stand to gain anything? More command? More respect? A higher position/promotion within the monastery? etc That's when I looked at: Administrative Histories — Saint John's Abbey

Now, before you read on, remember this: Andert, Wollmering, Tupa and Dan Ward were in charge of looking after the dorms during 2002. Aside from Dan Ward. Dan Ward was allegedly in Jamaica (Source: Rev. Dan Ward Confronted after Presentation (transcribed), Behind the Pine Curtain, January 24, 2016).

So that leaves Andert and Wollmering - both of whom were said to take turns looking after Metten Court. Tupa was Josh's resident advisor at Maur House.

This is where things got a little bit interesting.

Raymond Pedrizetti was listed as a prior during the time of Josh's disappearance:

28. Raymond Pedrizetti, OSB; June 28, 2001 - June 30, 2007. At this point, Raymond was aged 77.

And who did the role of prior fall to after Pedrizetti.... none other than Andert.

29. Thomas Andert, OSB; June 30, 2007 - August 10, 2015

Isn't that interesting, huh? I decided to look over who was Abbot during 2002.

10. Abbot John Klassen, OSB; November 24, 2000

Very interesting. So Klassen was the Abbot since the year 2002, and as soon as Pedrizetti retired the role, Andert was summoned in his place.

So then I went back to an article from that time, published on the Saint John's website and hosted on their archive. The article has a picture of Pedrizetti and Andert. Below them, it says:

"The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

2 years later, Wollmering is found dead, despite being "active and healthy".

Conclusion

I don't want to put 2+2 together and get 5. But I can't help but post this...

I wonder if Josh's paper was indeed saved on the university server and brought to the attention of some of the high ranking monks; the decision was made by the Abbot that something needed to be done about it. There could have been something on that paper that was devastating to Saint John's funding and that could have brought the university down.

In order to "get" Josh, they needed him on his own. It's abundantly clear this was not a random attack. This was a pre-meditated, targeted attack. It has crossed my mind more than once that I wonder if Josh did indeed make it to the bridge. And the jogger was Wollmering - as he was known as someone who jogged around campus. And Wollmering used a ruse (just like the FBI profile said) to get Josh into a position that Wollmering had full control of, which ended in foul play.

Wollmering was one of very few people to be able to run the incinerator - and it was said to be used on an off day (within a day or so of Josh's disappearance). And in order to ensure Wollmering couldn't ever talk about it, the Abbot ordered the prior to get rid of Wollmering, hence the: "The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

And again, I refer back to Abbot Klassen's words about Wollmering:

"I don't think Bruce ever imagined becoming an elderly monk. He said more than once that he prayed that God would take him quickly when the time came. At the same time, I don't think Bruce ever imagined dying in this particular way. But he would have had little patience with the year by year diminishments that are part of growing old... All of us will miss his outgoing energy and care." - Abbot John Klassen

I have read that paragraph at least 100x, maybe 250-300x. Every single time I read it, I get chills. It reads to me as if Klassen is saying, you're lucky in a way that you died in this way, so that you didn't get all the problems you'd have had if you got to a very old age.

Therefore, I really do wonder if Wollmering did indeed kidnap/kill Josh, and Abbot Klassen ordered his prior to dispose of Wollmering in order to save the university from a much worse abuse scandal than it already had; a murder case.

Thoughts?

 

[Marzipan]

Theory #2 Part #2 - Abduction by Monk(s)
Wollmering was almost certainly gay. At least, he had an attraction to boys/men (Source: St. John's publicly released files).

Following the FBI profile (2003) (Source) - Abbot Klassen was worried that it fit Bruce Wollmering. In 2004 Abbot Klassen refused to release Father Bruce Wollmering’s name to the public because of the effect that such an announcement would have on fund raising and enrollment. Klassen, who is also Saint John’s University’s chancellor, was worried that Father Wollmering would be connected to the disappearance of Joshua Guimond, a student at Saint John’s. While Abbot Klassen kept Father Wollmering’s name from the public, Wollmering reoffended (Source: BehindThePineCurtain).

This is all available online and from behind the pine curtain. You can go and read it all. So I decided to go and take a good look at who/what/where people were in 2002 and after 2009 when Wollmering was murdered passed away.

Sometimes, in truly bizarre cases like this, you have to look at who gains what - did anyone experience change after few years within the Abbey? Did anyone stand to gain anything? More command? More respect? A higher position/promotion within the monastery? etc That's when I looked at: Administrative Histories — Saint John's Abbey

Now, before you read on, remember this: Andert, Wollmering, Tupa and Dan Ward were in charge of looking after the dorms during 2002. Aside from Dan Ward. Dan Ward was allegedly in Jamaica (Source: Rev. Dan Ward Confronted after Presentation (transcribed), Behind the Pine Curtain, January 24, 2016).

So that leaves Andert and Wollmering - both of whom were said to take turns looking after Metten Court. Tupa was Josh's resident advisor at Maur House.

This is where things got a little bit interesting.

Raymond Pedrizetti was listed as a prior during the time of Josh's disappearance:

28. Raymond Pedrizetti, OSB; June 28, 2001 - June 30, 2007. At this point, Raymond was aged 77.

And who did the role of prior fall to after Pedrizetti.... none other than Andert.

29. Thomas Andert, OSB; June 30, 2007 - August 10, 2015

Isn't that interesting, huh? I decided to look over who was Abbot during 2002.

10. Abbot John Klassen, OSB; November 24, 2000

Very interesting. So Klassen was the Abbot since the year 2002, and as soon as Pedrizetti retired the role, Andert was summoned in his place.

So then I went back to an article from that time, published on the Saint John's website and hosted on their archive. The article has a picture of Pedrizetti and Andert. Below them, it says:

"The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

2 years later, Wollmering is found dead, despite being "active and healthy".

Conclusion

I don't want to put 2+2 together and get 5. But I can't help but post this...

I wonder if Josh's paper was indeed saved on the university server and brought to the attention of some of the high ranking monks; the decision was made by the Abbot that something needed to be done about it. There could have been something on that paper that was devastating to Saint John's funding and that could have brought the university down.

In order to "get" Josh, they needed him on his own. It's abundantly clear this was not a random attack. This was a pre-meditated, targeted attack. It has crossed my mind more than once that I wonder if Josh did indeed make it to the bridge. And the jogger was Wollmering - as he was known as someone who jogged around campus. And Wollmering used a ruse (just like the FBI profile said) to get Josh into a position that Wollmering had full control of, which ended in foul play.

Wollmering was one of very few people to be able to run the incinerator - and it was said to be used on an off day (within a day or so of Josh's disappearance). And in order to ensure Wollmering couldn't ever talk about it, the Abbot ordered the prior to get rid of Wollmering, hence the: "The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

And again, I refer back to Abbot Klassen's words about Wollmering:

"I don't think Bruce ever imagined becoming an elderly monk. He said more than once that he prayed that God would take him quickly when the time came. At the same time, I don't think Bruce ever imagined dying in this particular way. But he would have had little patience with the year by year diminishments that are part of growing old... All of us will miss his outgoing energy and care." - Abbot John Klassen

I have read that paragraph at least 100x, maybe 250-300x. Every single time I read it, I get chills. It reads to me as if Klassen is saying, you're lucky in a way that you died in this way, so that you didn't get all the problems you'd have had if you got to a very old age.

Therefore, I really do wonder if Wollmering did indeed kidnap/kill Josh, and Abbot Klassen ordered his prior to dispose of Wollmering in order to save the university from a much worse abuse scandal than it already had; a murder case.

Thoughts?

Yep, it’s a good theory. I think some of the bloggers have taken a lot of liberties with stating their theories as facts, so I don’t want to rely on them too much. But all of this has long been discussed.
Btw, can you verify that BW was the last or one of the last people to run the incinerator? Any factual link for that?
You are bringing up some good points about Klassen’s comments but I don’t know if we can make so much of that either. Who did BW’s autopsy? Did we ever see an official report on that? Sorry —this is getting to be a long time ago. People really do fall. Now hitting the head hard more than one time in a fall…even my 77-year-old mom who has fallen hard at least 6 times has avoided getting up and falling again right away with another head bang.
The guy was a criminal so no defending him here, but I want to point out that the “jogger” has been suspected of being someone else who was long a person of interest in the Jacob Wetterling case. And that man was innocent in that case. (As you likely know that innocent man quickly became suspected in Josh’s disappearance too.) We can’t just assign the unknown jogger role to anyone and call them the murderer. Totally possible someone else was just out jogging.

But the theory holds. I hate it but it holds. It’s just so horrible how the school enabled the criminal monks. And it’s not like any church leaders above them in the hierarchy were going to blow the whistle — far from it.
Which theory do you most believe? Do you have any other theories?
And was the thesis for sure on the school’s server? I would have thought students stored papers on their own hard drives.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Yep, it’s a good theory. I think some of the bloggers have taken a lot of liberties with stating their theories as facts, so I don’t want to rely on them too much. But all of this has long been discussed.
Btw, can you verify that BW was the last or one of the last people to run the incinerator? Any factual link for that?
You are bringing up some good points about Klassen’s comments but I don’t know if we can make so much of that either. Who did BW’s autopsy? Did we ever see an official report on that? Sorry —this is getting to be a long time ago. People really do fall. Now hitting the head hard more than one time in a fall…even my 77-year-old mom who has fallen hard at least 6 times has avoided getting up and falling again right away with another head bang.
The guy was a criminal so no defending him here, but I want to point out that the “jogger” has been suspected of being someone else who was long a person of interest in the Jacob Wetterling case. And that man was innocent in that case. (As you likely know that innocent man quickly became suspected in Josh’s disappearance too.) We can’t just assign the unknown jogger role to anyone and call them the murderer. Totally possible someone else was just out jogging.

But the theory holds. I hate it but it holds. It’s just so horrible how the school enabled the criminal monks. And it’s not like any church leaders above them in the hierarchy were going to blow the whistle — far from it.
Which theory do you most believe? Do you have any other theories?
And was the thesis for sure on the school’s server? I would have thought students stored papers on their own hard drives.

Some really good questions there, I'll try to answer each of them to the best of my ability.

1) I haven't got any sources/factual links for BW being the last person to run the incinerator - as far as I'm aware, I'm not even sure they'd have such a record. If they do - and it indeed showed that BW ran the incinerator on an off-day, that would be huge in this case. All I've got to go on is that BW had access to run an incinerator and reports say that an incinerator was used within days of Josh's disappearance on an off-day. Not sure we'll ever get more than that unfortunately.

2) I've attached the autopsy report to this post. And if this case wasn't so serious - It'd be hard not to read the autopsy like a comedy sketch, with the seemingly endless amount of injuries sustained for a "fall".

Now what's interesting about the autopsy, is that it says: "Cause of death: accidental probable" in the preliminary autopsy report. In the final report, there's no cause of death page.
I'm going to briefly break down Wollmering's injuries from his "fall"

• pulmonary edema - fluid on the lungs
• bloody mucus in nasal passages
• Right lateral rib fracture 4 and 5
• Haemorrhage of soft tissue (likely caused by rib fracture)
• Abrasions (varying sizes) on bridge of nose, left eyebrow, left frontal scalp, right temple, left ear - all of these abrasions, accumulatively would measure 8.0 x 6.0cm (that's huge)
• laceration on middle / right-side of head 2.3cm in length
• 2.0cm laceration which extends through the ear
• Scalp 4.0cm x 1.0cm laceration by ear
• Subgaleal hematoma (multiple)
• Skull fracture (long fracture)

Regarding a rib fracture - "Rib fractures occur when a significant enough force directed at the rib causes a break. Most rib fractures are due to direct penetrating or blunt trauma to the chest." Source: Rib Fracture - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf

It sounds to me like Wollmering was pushed. Hard. Multiple times. It doesn't sound like a fall.

3) True, no firm evidence it was him jogging - but the fact he was a keen jogger, the fact he was monitoring the Metten Court apartment, the fact there was a jogger sighted at midnight when Josh was sighted leaving Metten Court at 11:57 - it really only does point to one person that's "likely" to be jogging at that time, from that direction (heading towards campus). That's before you look at the FBI profile which matches Wollmering almost to the letter. Wollmering was not at all happy with AI for this (AI who published the profile) and demanded that "someone should talk to him" (I paraphrase, may not be an exact quote). That said - it's still completely possible to be someone else jogging, but the evidence we have strongly points to Wollmering in my opinion.

4) Now this is the real question and I'm at a crossroads. I believe one of my theories is correct. A) Josh had an overdose, his friends panicked as they had an illegal narcotics/ID thing going on, so they placed Josh in the dumpster. B) A monk (Wollmering?) used a ruse to get Josh alone, in a bad position to kill him in such a way that his paper never got out there

Which theory do I believe more? Despite the bizarre behaviour from the friends, and the deleting of data, sadly, I think it's the monk theory. But I'm 60/40. 60% monk theory, 40% overdose theory. I really do believe one of these theories is correct.

I'm afraid I don't have any more theories. I would be shocked (and I mean really shocked) if one of those two theories is completely wrong. Based on evidence we have from interviews, articles, documentaries, files on the monks etc etc I think those are the best 2 theories I've got.

5) Students usually have the choice on where to save e.g locally or on the server

As for where we go from here, I don't know. Interested to get more thoughts on this theory.

TL;DR - In short, I think Wollmering was likely to have been behind the foul play - as for why - it could have been Josh about to expose Wollmering by interviewing his victims, detailing what he/other monks did in Jamaica (Jamaica is known for paedophile activity) - and interestingly enough - Josh did visit Jamaica. I thought it was extremely interesting what I found when Andert became prior:

"The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

It makes me feel like the Abbot had enough of Wollmering and wanted him gone, permanently. "Dead men don't talk" as they say - and I think that's the case with Wollmering.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

The only other thing(s) I've got to say to follow up my 2nd theory, are:

• Bloodhounds tracked Josh's scent to the abbey (or, to be more specific, the Abbey Chapter House) <<< this is where the monks would meet up (and presumably make campus-wide decisions?)
• On December 29th, a bloodhound called "Hoover" was hired.
• Josh's scent was found at the Abbey. The Abbey refused Hoover the search in the Abbey.
• On January 5th, Hoover traced the scent to the Abbey again.
• On January 18th, searchers were ordered to stop searching with Hoover. The Abbey said Hoover was because "pets are not allowed on Campus" <<< which is utterly insane. A person is missing, potentially deceased, and the Abbey are suggesting a search/sniffer dog is a "pet"
• March 12th, 2004 - Saint John's University requested a temporary restraining order on Brian to prevent him searching there for his son, Josh
• Dan Ward was asked by a former student about Josh and was cut off by Abbot Klassen (Source: Rev. Dan Ward Confronted After Presentation (Transcribed) | BehindThePineCurtain.com)
• Original incinerator was knocked down (need a reference/evidential link to prove this, but I have heard several people say this)
• Metten Court has been knocked down
• Wollmering is dead

The final 3 points being absolutely HUGE if you ask me. Incinerator knocked down, Metten Court knocked down, one person who fits the profile, dead. Someone really tried hard to cover this up.

For these reasons, plus my 2nd theory (above few posts), I am leaning to this being the prominent theory I have.

Please note: I will be going offline for a while to do some research. Please don't think I've forgotten about the case - far from it. I'll continue to check the board and see what people say/do with my theories. As I say, I am confident one of the two theories is likely close to the truth - unless we learn more information that we've not heard before.

 

[Marzipan]

The only other thing(s) I've got to say to follow up my 2nd theory, are:

• Bloodhounds tracked Josh's scent to the abbey (or, to be more specific, the Abbey Chapter House) <<< this is where the monks would meet up (and presumably make campus-wide decisions?)
• On December 29th, a bloodhound called "Hoover" was hired.
• Josh's scent was found at the Abbey. The Abbey refused Hoover the search in the Abbey.
• On January 5th, Hoover traced the scent to the Abbey again.
• On January 18th, searchers were ordered to stop searching with Hoover. The Abbey said Hoover was because "pets are not allowed on Campus" <<< which is utterly insane. A person is missing, potentially deceased, and the Abbey are suggesting a search/sniffer dog is a "pet"
• March 12th, 2004 - Saint John's University requested a temporary restraining order on Brian to prevent him searching there for his son, Josh
• Dan Ward was asked by a former student about Josh and was cut off by Abbot Klassen (Source: Rev. Dan Ward Confronted After Presentation (Transcribed) | BehindThePineCurtain.com)
• Original incinerator was knocked down (need a reference/evidential link to prove this, but I have heard several people say this)
• Metten Court has been knocked down
• Wollmering is dead

The final 3 points being absolutely HUGE if you ask me. Incinerator knocked down, Metten Court knocked down, one person who fits the profile, dead. Someone really tried hard to cover this up.

For these reasons, plus my 2nd theory (above few posts), I am leaning to this being the prominent theory I have.

Please note: I will be going offline for a while to do some research. Please don't think I've forgotten about the case - far from it. I'll continue to check the board and see what people say/do with my theories. As I say, I am confident one of the two theories is likely close to the truth - unless we learn more information that we've not heard before.

I wish more people would weigh in again too, or that we could have had your participation earlier on when there was more overall participation. I will also try to go offline for a bit —I have a non-sleuth writing project I’ve been at a standstill on and need to get back to it. Some of these sad cases get too immersive for me, and the ones with missing/vanished young people are the worst. No closure.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Does anyone know what this is referring to? Tip re Wollmering | BehindThePineCurtain.com

A possible tip relating to Wollmering and a canoe? I'm curious why canoe and Wollmering are in the same sentence.

Also, still unable to get the tunnel map. The one I need is likely this one: https://web.archive.org/web/2014041.../sju-archives/sjuhistory/sjubuildings/tunnels

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I'm back with what I believe is strong theory. A simple, yet strong theory. For me, this theory shoots to #1 spot in terms of how likely it was to happen in my opinion. I hate when people mention occams razor - but I think maybe I've been guilty of trying extra hard to figure out how the monks could have done this, or the poker party were behind it, when the answer may have been staring at us in the face the entire time. And the premise is rather simple and straight-forward.

I've read at least 50+ people commenting online saying that they think the orange Pontiac Sunfire was a drug dealer, dropping off who knows what kind of drugs onto the campus - and that's what I thought ever since I heard about it. The car was seen a couple of times on campus, and when students were almost caught in it, they got out and ran off. (Source: Simply Vanished)

And then I recalled a post I'd read on the findjoshua website, which read:

"You talk about silence, how about the silence on drug and alcohol use at St. John's? Seems to me there is also a conspiracy of silence among the students about the party atmosphere. Students would have a very good reason to be silent about all this, underage drinking and drug use are illegal. Students making pot buys or ecstasy open up a door to the criminal drug community. 90% of all the pot and illegal drugs in Minnesota are handled by a single drug cartel." - (Source: FindJoshua.com - Message Board Archive)

And that's when it dawned on me. A lightbulb moment.

Josh and his friends were accused of having a narcotics business. Dana said "Josh never left without saying bye".

And that's when it all started making sense in my mind: Drugs. Cartel. Car that visits campus at night. Police locate driver. Crushed car. Josh missing. Slipped out at midnight. Friends saying they didn't see where he went. Friends being intentionally vague.

What if Josh was going to meet the drug dealer and things went very badly wrong. Perhaps there was a drug debt and Josh went to discuss it. It explains why the "friends" all kept quiet. They had careers to protect. It explains why the washer was run - they knew Josh wasn't coming back and they better try and hide evidence of drugs on the computer.

The stuff about monks is plausible but at the same time, it's a bit of an "out there" theory. The gay theory...Josh flirting/talking online - I don't think that's got too much meaning, it was probably for fun. I don't think him being straight/bi/gay makes a damn bit of difference. I don't think it's relevant. The theory I had about the poker party - again, plausible, but friends picking up the body and moving it - that's a nasty thing to have done and live with.

Whereas this theory. The cartel. A drug dealer. They're not going to take a drug debt lightly. And the biggest thing that we've all not given enough thought: the car was crushed once the police tracked it down... That is just simply not normal. Crushing a car, whilst it can obviously be for legit reasons - the fact it was done after the police tracked it down is making me think that actually, I / we have been focusing on the wrong things.

I know it sounds like something you'd see in a movie (

) but this is not beyond the realms of possibilities at all. Drug dealers kill all the time for those who don't/can't/wont pay up. And if you're thinking: "no way, if you kill him, he could never pay back, so this theory can't be right" - the dealer/cartel will absorb the loss and have you gone as a punishment.

Images of car from files Netflix Unsolved Mysteries released:

Burnt-orange-Pontiac-Sunfire-angle-1 hosted at ImgBB

Image Burnt-orange-Pontiac-Sunfire-angle-1 hosted in ImgBB

ibb.co

Burnt-orange-Pontiac-Sunfire-angle-2 hosted at ImgBB

Image Burnt-orange-Pontiac-Sunfire-angle-2 hosted in ImgBB

ibb.co

Regarding the guy driving the car: "They were able to locate the driver, but he didn’t provide any additional information, and the car was destroyed before an investigation could be conducted." (Source: These New 'Unsolved Mysteries' Leads May Help Solve A 20-Year Missing Person Case).

I'd be interested to know if the driver of the vehicle had any links to drugs/cartel. The fact the car was able to be destroyed before an investigation could be started is nothing short of negligent police work. Shameful. That car had to be relevant. There's just simply no way you'd crush a car following a police visit unless there's something you want to get rid of.

That all being said, this is (sadly) my no #1 theory.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

My last few thoughts on this case before I hope dark, sasquatch and many of the other great posters and researchers come back with their thoughts. But since my last post, I watched the netflix documentary twice. And I am feeling fairly confident that 1 of the 3 theories I posted is right.

Theory 1: Josh had an overdose in bathroom that night at the poker party, friends panicked, disposed of body in dumpster hence why the alleged sighting was a girl behind Metten Court who said he had gone past the dumpster (diverts attention). Then the friends wiped the computer, or at least, attempted to.

Theory 2: Wollmering was jogging towards campus and on the way used a ruse to get Josh to the abbey, possibly going undetected by going to the abbey via underground tunnels (still desperate for those tunnel maps). It's possible Josh had something on Wollmering that would destroy St John's for good. Wollmering was then murdered by either someone who wanted revenge for Josh, or by the prior, as they must carry out wishes by the abbot, which explains the abbots exceptionally strange obituary comments I posted a page or so ago.

Theory 3) And for me, this is the most likely. Josh had left the poker party to go and buy drugs from the dealer (assuming he was a drug dealer) in the orange Pontiac. There was a dispute over debt or some kind of issue which led to Josh being taken off campus. If I had to guess, I'd say this deal gone wrong happened in the car park near Maur House. A dark car park is highly likely where a drug deal would go down. It explains why the computer was wiped, to hide evidence of drugs. It's very possible that the yahoo personals didn't just include flirtatious chat, but was also how they'd speak to their drug dealer. It makes me wonder if the mysterious 27 minute call Josh had a week or so before going missing was to a drug dealer. Let's face it, Josh used a prepaid card that was untraceable. Then he deleted his yahoo. I do wonder if he'd been threatened by a drug dealer. That's before you factor in some extra tiny little details which make this my number 1 theory: the car was crushed following police interviewing the driver. The driver provided very very very little evidence, in fact, I'd argue the driver is clearly lying. The driver isn't "dropping off a student" at that time of night.

The Pontiac sunfire is a 2 seater coupe/roadster style car. On the two occasions it was seen, a college age male was seen in the passenger seat. One not identified and one ran off. This suggests the drug deals are done inside of the car. Makes sense right? So this would explain why Josh would have got into that car and felt somewhat comfortable getting into that car. The fact it was crushed after police interviewed the driver tells me that there's something being hidden, and it's not just drugs. The sheriffs need to check the drivers link to drugs or cartel.

And finally, theory 3 would explain Nick's timeline. Someone at the party could have got to Nick and said that Josh hasn't returned after going to see the drug dealer, to which they (a select few who knew Josh was going to get the drugs) kept quiet.

Theory 1 and 3 would also explain why the group were quiet and subdued when Brian's private investigator told them to their faces he knew about the narcotics.

And theory 1, if we went with that one, would explain Nick's timeline.

I believe all of the friends know more than they are saying, I always have believed that. I believe one of those above theories is right. I believe there's a chance this is a drug deal/drug debt gone badly wrong.

If I had to rate my theories, I'd say it's 3, 1, 2 in that order.

As always, would appreciate thoughts, comments or questions.

 

[Valiant]

My last few thoughts on this case before I hope dark, sasquatch and many of the other great posters and researchers come back with their thoughts. But since my last post, I watched the netflix documentary twice. And I am feeling fairly confident that 1 of the 3 theories I posted is right.

Theory 1: Josh had an overdose in bathroom that night at the poker party, friends panicked, disposed of body in dumpster hence why the alleged sighting was a girl behind Metten Court who said he had gone past the dumpster (diverts attention). Then the friends wiped the computer, or at least, attempted to.

Theory 2: Wollmering was jogging towards campus and on the way used a ruse to get Josh to the abbey, possibly going undetected by going to the abbey via underground tunnels (still desperate for those tunnel maps). It's possible Josh had something on Wollmering that would destroy St John's for good. Wollmering was then murdered by either someone who wanted revenge for Josh, or by the prior, as they must carry out wishes by the abbot, which explains the abbots exceptionally strange obituary comments I posted a page or so ago.

Theory 3) And for me, this is the most likely. Josh had left the poker party to go and buy drugs from the dealer (assuming he was a drug dealer) in the orange Pontiac. There was a dispute over debt or some kind of issue which led to Josh being taken off campus. If I had to guess, I'd say this deal gone wrong happened in the car park near Maur House. A dark car park is highly likely where a drug deal would go down. It explains why the computer was wiped, to hide evidence of drugs. It's very possible that the yahoo personals didn't just include flirtatious chat, but was also how they'd speak to their drug dealer. It makes me wonder if the mysterious 27 minute call Josh had a week or so before going missing was to a drug dealer. Let's face it, Josh used a prepaid card that was untraceable. Then he deleted his yahoo. I do wonder if he'd been threatened by a drug dealer. That's before you factor in some extra tiny little details which make this my number 1 theory: the car was crushed following police interviewing the driver. The driver provided very very very little evidence, in fact, I'd argue the driver is clearly lying. The driver isn't "dropping off a student" at that time of night.

The Pontiac sunfire is a 2 seater coupe/roadster style car. On the two occasions it was seen, a college age male was seen in the passenger seat. One not identified and one ran off. This suggests the drug deals are done inside of the car. Makes sense right? So this would explain why Josh would have got into that car and felt somewhat comfortable getting into that car. The fact it was crushed after police interviewed the driver tells me that there's something being hidden, and it's not just drugs. The sheriffs need to check the drivers link to drugs or cartel.

And finally, theory 3 would explain Nick's timeline. Someone at the party could have got to Nick and said that Josh hasn't returned after going to see the drug dealer, to which they (a select few who knew Josh was going to get the drugs) kept quiet.

Theory 1 and 3 would also explain why the group were quiet and subdued when Brian's private investigator told them to their faces he knew about the narcotics.

And theory 1, if we went with that one, would explain Nick's timeline.

I believe all of the friends know more than they are saying, I always have believed that. I believe one of those above theories is right. I believe there's a chance this is a drug deal/drug debt gone badly wrong.

If I had to The Pontiac Solstice is a 2 seater. The Pontiac Sunfire is a compact 4 seat car.

My last few thoughts on this case before I hope dark, sasquatch and many of the other great posters and researchers come back with their thoughts. But since my last post, I watched the netflix documentary twice. And I am feeling fairly confident that 1 of the 3 theories I posted is right.

Theory 1: Josh had an overdose in bathroom that night at the poker party, friends panicked, disposed of body in dumpster hence why the alleged sighting was a girl behind Metten Court who said he had gone past the dumpster (diverts attention). Then the friends wiped the computer, or at least, attempted to.

Theory 2: Wollmering was jogging towards campus and on the way used a ruse to get Josh to the abbey, possibly going undetected by going to the abbey via underground tunnels (still desperate for those tunnel maps). It's possible Josh had something on Wollmering that would destroy St John's for good. Wollmering was then murdered by either someone who wanted revenge for Josh, or by the prior, as they must carry out wishes by the abbot, which explains the abbots exceptionally strange obituary comments I posted a page or so ago.

Theory 3) And for me, this is the most likely. Josh had left the poker party to go and buy drugs from the dealer (assuming he was a drug dealer) in the orange Pontiac. There was a dispute over debt or some kind of issue which led to Josh being taken off campus. If I had to guess, I'd say this deal gone wrong happened in the car park near Maur House. A dark car park is highly likely where a drug deal would go down. It explains why the computer was wiped, to hide evidence of drugs. It's very possible that the yahoo personals didn't just include flirtatious chat, but was also how they'd speak to their drug dealer. It makes me wonder if the mysterious 27 minute call Josh had a week or so before going missing was to a drug dealer. Let's face it, Josh used a prepaid card that was untraceable. Then he deleted his yahoo. I do wonder if he'd been threatened by a drug dealer. That's before you factor in some extra tiny little details which make this my number 1 theory: the car was crushed following police interviewing the driver. The driver provided very very very little evidence, in fact, I'd argue the driver is clearly lying. The driver isn't "dropping off a student" at that time of night.

The Pontiac sunfire is a 2 seater coupe/roadster style car. On the two occasions it was seen, a college age male was seen in the passenger seat. One not identified and one ran off. This suggests the drug deals are done inside of the car. Makes sense right? So this would explain why Josh would have got into that car and felt somewhat comfortable getting into that car. The fact it was crushed after police interviewed the driver tells me that there's something being hidden, and it's not just drugs. The sheriffs need to check the drivers link to drugs or cartel.

And finally, theory 3 would explain Nick's timeline. Someone at the party could have got to Nick and said that Josh hasn't returned after going to see the drug dealer, to which they (a select few who knew Josh was going to get the drugs) kept quiet.

Theory 1 and 3 would also explain why the group were quiet and subdued when Brian's private investigator told them to their faces he knew about the narcotics.

And theory 1, if we went with that one, would explain Nick's timeline.

I believe all of the friends know more than they are saying, I always have believed that. I believe one of those above theories is right. I believe there's a chance this is a drug deal/drug debt gone badly wrong.

If I had to rate my theories, I'd say it's 3, 1, 2 in that order.

As always, would appreciate thoughts, comments or questions.

The Pontiac Sunfire is a small 4 seat car, it is the Pontiac Solstice that was a 2 seat sporty car.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

The Pontiac Sunfire is a small 4 seat car, it is the Pontiac Solstice that was a 2 seat sporty car.

Thanks for confirming. The fact it's a 4-seater actually makes that theory a little bit stronger, and doesn't break the theory, which is good.

At this point, I can't help but feel that it wont get solved unless someone talks. The problem with this case is all the possibilities are just as believable as each other and that every theory has an issue which makes it extremely suspicious:

• Katie / Nick involvement theory - timeline issue is absolutely huge. 1 hour 40 mins is a huge timeframe
• Monks theory - denied access to abbey for 1 week, banned Brian from campus, B. Wollmering's mysterious death years later
• Pontiac theory - car crushed
• Poker party overdose theory - no one saw Josh actually leave, just extremely vague descriptions, including the sightings - why would someone be randomly standing behind a dumpster at the precise time Josh was going past and not even speak - looking at a map/google street view - that's an exceptionally narrow path - you'd virtually brush shoulders if someone walked past you - the sighting seems strange to me, especially considering the girl in question "knew Josh well"
• Sighting on the bridge - very vague details, just "turned around and he'd gone!" - how long after you saw this person did you turn around? What made you turn around in the first place? Was it even Josh? Timeline of the sightings is off (12:15-12:30am) compared to the sighting behind the dumpster at (11:57am) - considering that's a 30 second walk
• Abbey theory - bloodhounds not allowed in the abbey, but when they finally were, Josh's scent was in the abbey

One thing I haven't covered too much, but I think we need to re-evaluate is Nick. I've read pretty much every single comment relating to this case on youtube, and the things that keep popping up are:

• Nick/Katie's time discrepancy
• Nick's acceptance to do the polygraph then refusal do to the polygraph claiming he didn't want a false positive
• Nick liked Katie (they both admit it, plus photos of them together almost exclude Josh in every photo)
• Nick and Josh had an argument (about Katie) the same night Josh went missing
• Nick shared the top floor of the dorm with Josh - easy access to his computer - and from what I understand, Nick did indeed have a profile on the computer
• Nick smiling on the bridge as they're looking for Josh in the Netflix documentary just stands out as being very strange (Pic: Nick-Smile hosted at ImgBB)
• Nick claiming Josh's door was shut several times in the Netflix documentary, as if to infer he didn't go into the room
• Nick claiming he was Josh's best friend several times in the Netflix documentary, as if to convince us/himself
• Nick's mannerisms in the Netflix documentary seem off
• Katie wasn't with Josh's mom in the Netflix documentary - but Dana was - I think that speaks volumes
• There was a rumour that Katie left Josh to be with Nick (which might explain the point above)
• Nick/Katie just so happened to be hanging out together on the night Josh goes missing*
• The FBI profile had a line that said "When he is finally apprehended, many will be shocked, asserting that this was the last person they would have suspected of being capable of such a heinous crime." **
• Nick points out (randomly) that Josh's car was in the same place he'd last parked it ***

Forget the monk(s), overdose and orange pontiac theory for a second and lets go back to the very, very basics.

* There's definitely a love-triangle going on here. Josh and Nick had an argument about Katie that night. Katie and Josh were romantically involved for 4 and a half years, so it's understandable why he'd not be comfortable with his best friend dating her. That's a no-go-zone for most people - but not Nick. Then what bothers me is this: the fact that Katie had asked Nick and Josh the very night Josh went missing to go to her place; the one night she'd asked both guys to go to her place - the one who didn't go to her place ends up missing? - and that missing person just so happens to be her ex, and the "best friend" of the guy she has kissed twice. That strikes me as odd.

Therefore, I'm going to pose a very, very wild and crazy idea that we should at least consider for a second...

If Josh went to Katie's with Nick that night instead of going to the poker game. Would foul play still have happened? Did Katie and Nick want to be alone with Josh that night? and when he went to the poker party, they had to wait until after he left it to "get" him? Could Katie and Nick have been planning something sinister? and could that explain Nick's timeline? Did Katie leave her dorm and keycard back in during that night? I would love if someone could provide Katie's whereabouts and Katie's keycard records that night.

** It would be a shock if Nick was responsible, would it not? Their timeline doesn't add up and Nick doesn't keycard in until 2:43am, despite Katie saying he left at 1-1:30am. Let's think about this: Katie had roommates, right? Why haven't these roommates validated Katie or Nick's timeline? Were Katie's roommates even there to corroborate her story? The whole Katie and Nick thing absolutely stinks to me. There's something I personally don't like about it and struggle to shrug off.

*** Nick mentioning Josh's car was in the same place - who the hell notices where someone parks, or even remarks on that. Nick's overly detailed descriptions are suspicious to me.

Nick has approximately 1 hour 43 minutes (103 minutes) of unaccounted time if we believe Katie's 1am story. Then I take into consideration Nick mentions Josh's car - no one asked him about Josh's car, but he mentioned it. So let's work with that.

We know that distance = speed / time. Let's assume "someone" used Josh's car to take him away from university (as Josh's keys were freely available on his desk and Josh's DNA would be in his car, so it wouldn't matter too much if police did check his car and found his DNA). Let's say they travelled 40 minutes each way, and were travelling at 40 mph - that's a 26 mile radius. And that journey could be done with 23 minutes to spare... and you could keycard back by 2:43am. The radius would look like this:

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I've spotted something I think you should all take a look at. Posted on another missing persons case thread:

Possible Victims: Louisiana

http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_missing_students.html Jeremy Houk 18-year-old Tulane University student MISSING: 3/1/03 New Orleans FOUND: 5/14/03 Mississippi River Cause of Death: Drowning

www.websleuths.com

 

[Marzipan]

I've spotted something I think you should all take a look at. Posted on another missing persons case thread:

Possible Victims: Louisiana

http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_missing_students.html Jeremy Houk 18-year-old Tulane University student MISSING: 3/1/03 New Orleans FOUND: 5/14/03 Mississippi River Cause of Death: Drowning

www.websleuths.com

I think you are going to drive yourself nuts with this theory and so just have to say nope, nope, nope. Save yourself! When, like the “smiley face killer” theory, people want it to fit some widely ranging serial killer of college boys and drowning in water, just no. They can’t all be connected. Trying to connect v them feels reassuring, as if there can’t possibly be that many bad guys so it must have been just one, or as if the sad reality of alcohol doesn’t take these boys endlessly.
And I’ll weigh in against an actual drug cartel killer as well.
They are super unlikely to have been dealing drugs at a high enough level to owe more than a few hundred bucks without us knowing more about this business. I’ll confess right now that I’m from Minnesota and my high school through college boyfriend used and dealt drugs in the 1980s. Those above him were jerks but still not killers. They were probably a dozen layers underneath cartel leaders or those who do the really dirty work for them. It’s just that there’s no motivation to kills kid who owes money. They will get the money. Payback can be arranged. Now I know a lot had changed by2002 but still super far down the list.
I would say more on this if I thought you were convinced but I know you see all the reasons for all your other theories.
Btw, the smile on the face of Josh’s best friend in that photo disturbs me too. I’m not going to rank my theories again right now, but I’ll say that the idea of Josh being removed by a close acquaintance would be somewhere in the top 5. But in my mind that acquaintance would only be a male, with no criminal involvement of female friends. Statistics and my read on those interviewed for the documentary.

 

[Marzipan]

Thanks for confirming. The fact it's a 4-seater actually makes that theory a little bit stronger, and doesn't break the theory, which is good.

At this point, I can't help but feel that it wont get solved unless someone talks. The problem with this case is all the possibilities are just as believable as each other and that every theory has an issue which makes it extremely suspicious:

• Katie / Nick involvement theory - timeline issue is absolutely huge. 1 hour 40 mins is a huge timeframe
• Monks theory - denied access to abbey for 1 week, banned Brian from campus, B. Wollmering's mysterious death years later
• Pontiac theory - car crushed
• Poker party overdose theory - no one saw Josh actually leave, just extremely vague descriptions, including the sightings - why would someone be randomly standing behind a dumpster at the precise time Josh was going past and not even speak - looking at a map/google street view - that's an exceptionally narrow path - you'd virtually brush shoulders if someone walked past you - the sighting seems strange to me, especially considering the girl in question "knew Josh well"
• Sighting on the bridge - very vague details, just "turned around and he'd gone!" - how long after you saw this person did you turn around? What made you turn around in the first place? Was it even Josh? Timeline of the sightings is off (12:15-12:30am) compared to the sighting behind the dumpster at (11:57am) - considering that's a 30 second walk
• Abbey theory - bloodhounds not allowed in the abbey, but when they finally were, Josh's scent was in the abbey

One thing I haven't covered too much, but I think we need to re-evaluate is Nick. I've read pretty much every single comment relating to this case on youtube, and the things that keep popping up are:

• Nick/Katie's time discrepancy
• Nick's acceptance to do the polygraph then refusal do to the polygraph claiming he didn't want a false positive
• Nick liked Katie (they both admit it, plus photos of them together almost exclude Josh in every photo)
• Nick and Josh had an argument (about Katie) the same night Josh went missing
• Nick shared the top floor of the dorm with Josh - easy access to his computer - and from what I understand, Nick did indeed have a profile on the computer
• Nick smiling on the bridge as they're looking for Josh in the Netflix documentary just stands out as being very strange (Pic: Nick-Smile hosted at ImgBB)
• Nick claiming Josh's door was shut several times in the Netflix documentary, as if to infer he didn't go into the room
• Nick claiming he was Josh's best friend several times in the Netflix documentary, as if to convince us/himself
• Nick's mannerisms in the Netflix documentary seem off
• Katie wasn't with Josh's mom in the Netflix documentary - but Dana was - I think that speaks volumes
• There was a rumour that Katie left Josh to be with Nick (which might explain the point above)
• Nick/Katie just so happened to be hanging out together on the night Josh goes missing*
• The FBI profile had a line that said "When he is finally apprehended, many will be shocked, asserting that this was the last person they would have suspected of being capable of such a heinous crime." **
• Nick points out (randomly) that Josh's car was in the same place he'd last parked it ***

Forget the monk(s), overdose and orange pontiac theory for a second and lets go back to the very, very basics.

* There's definitely a love-triangle going on here. Josh and Nick had an argument about Katie that night. Katie and Josh were romantically involved for 4 and a half years, so it's understandable why he'd not be comfortable with his best friend dating her. That's a no-go-zone for most people - but not Nick. Then what bothers me is this: the fact that Katie had asked Nick and Josh the very night Josh went missing to go to her place; the one night she'd asked both guys to go to her place - the one who didn't go to her place ends up missing? - and that missing person just so happens to be her ex, and the "best friend" of the guy she has kissed twice. That strikes me as odd.

Therefore, I'm going to pose a very, very wild and crazy idea that we should at least consider for a second...

If Josh went to Katie's with Nick that night instead of going to the poker game. Would foul play still have happened? Did Katie and Nick want to be alone with Josh that night? and when he went to the poker party, they had to wait until after he left it to "get" him? Could Katie and Nick have been planning something sinister? and could that explain Nick's timeline? Did Katie leave her dorm and keycard back in during that night? I would love if someone could provide Katie's whereabouts and Katie's keycard records that night.

** It would be a shock if Nick was responsible, would it not? Their timeline doesn't add up and Nick doesn't keycard in until 2:43am, despite Katie saying he left at 1-1:30am. Let's think about this: Katie had roommates, right? Why haven't these roommates validated Katie or Nick's timeline? Were Katie's roommates even there to corroborate her story? The whole Katie and Nick thing absolutely stinks to me. There's something I personally don't like about it and struggle to shrug off.

*** Nick mentioning Josh's car was in the same place - who the hell notices where someone parks, or even remarks on that. Nick's overly detailed descriptions are suspicious to me.

Nick has approximately 1 hour 43 minutes (103 minutes) of unaccounted time if we believe Katie's 1am story. Then I take into consideration Nick mentions Josh's car - no one asked him about Josh's car, but he mentioned it. So let's work with that.

We know that distance = speed / time. Let's assume "someone" used Josh's car to take him away from university (as Josh's keys were freely available on his desk and Josh's DNA would be in his car, so it wouldn't matter too much if police did check his car and found his DNA). Let's say they travelled 40 minutes each way, and were travelling at 40 mph - that's a 26 mile radius. And that journey could be done with 23 minutes to spare... and you could keycard back by 2:43am. The radius would look like this:

View attachment 458213

Mille Lacs is a huuuge lake — I’ll give you that. When you drive by it you don’t see land — you just see water forever. I’m sure it hides many bodies.
Edited to add: But it takes over an hour each way by roadway. I think you are doing as how the crow flies. Map from St. John’s to the town of Onamia.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I think you are going to drive yourself nuts with this theory and so just have to say nope, nope, nope. Save yourself! When, like the “smiley face killer” theory, people want it to fit some widely ranging serial killer of college boys and drowning in water, just no. They can’t all be connected. Trying to connect v them feels reassuring, as if there can’t possibly be that many bad guys so it must have been just one, or as if the sad reality of alcohol doesn’t take these boys endlessly.
And I’ll weigh in against an actual drug cartel killer as well.
They are super unlikely to have been dealing drugs at a high enough level to owe more than a few hundred bucks without us knowing more about this business. I’ll confess right now that I’m from Minnesota and my high school through college boyfriend used and dealt drugs in the 1980s. Those above him were jerks but still not killers. They were probably a dozen layers underneath cartel leaders or those who do the really dirty work for them. It’s just that there’s no motivation to kills kid who owes money. They will get the money. Payback can be arranged. Now I know a lot had changed by2002 but still super far down the list.
I would say more on this if I thought you were convinced but I know you see all the reasons for all your other theories.
Btw, the smile on the face of Josh’s best friend in that photo disturbs me too. I’m not going to rank my theories again right now, but I’ll say that the idea of Josh being removed by a close acquaintance would be somewhere in the top 5. But in my mind that acquaintance would only be a male, with no criminal involvement of female friends. Statistics and my read on those interviewed for the documentary.

Thanks, really interesting post. Now I've posted my top 3 theories, and I'm relatively convinced each one stands strong, I figured I'd go off and explore some other theories that are less likely. I have definitely found another interesting thing but I'll need time to work on it before it's ready to present.

But I agree that the close acquaintance thing is the most obvious one that stands out above the rest, there's motive there, everything is there. This has to be the most frustrating case I've ever seen because of the 3 theories I posted, plus the close acquaintance.. it could easily be any of the 4.

Regarding Mille Lacs, yep you're right I was doing an as the crow flies style radius, which means that in reality, it would mean that radius is probably smaller and Josh isn't likely to be in that lake - that's assuming a close acquaintance was responsible, and assuming the concealment of the body was done on the same night in one journey i.e the person responsible didn't go back another night to move the body again... But that sounds messy, and I don't think we're dealing with someone who is messy. This is someone with above average intelligence, who knows the campus and surrounding areas well, well enough to get away with this for upwards of 20 years. I'll have to go back to the drawing board to consider some of these alternate theories.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I think you are going to drive yourself nuts with this theory and so just have to say nope, nope, nope. Save yourself! When, like the “smiley face killer” theory, people want it to fit some widely ranging serial killer of college boys and drowning in water, just no. They can’t all be connected. Trying to connect v them feels reassuring, as if there can’t possibly be that many bad guys so it must have been just one, or as if the sad reality of alcohol doesn’t take these boys endlessly.
And I’ll weigh in against an actual drug cartel killer as well.
They are super unlikely to have been dealing drugs at a high enough level to owe more than a few hundred bucks without us knowing more about this business. I’ll confess right now that I’m from Minnesota and my high school through college boyfriend used and dealt drugs in the 1980s. Those above him were jerks but still not killers. They were probably a dozen layers underneath cartel leaders or those who do the really dirty work for them. It’s just that there’s no motivation to kills kid who owes money. They will get the money. Payback can be arranged. Now I know a lot had changed by2002 but still super far down the list.
I would say more on this if I thought you were convinced but I know you see all the reasons for all your other theories.
Btw, the smile on the face of Josh’s best friend in that photo disturbs me too. I’m not going to rank my theories again right now, but I’ll say that the idea of Josh being removed by a close acquaintance would be somewhere in the top 5. But in my mind that acquaintance would only be a male, with no criminal involvement of female friends. Statistics and my read on those interviewed for the documentary.

I'll explain my thought process later, but for now... I'm looking for a lake, water....anywhere within 45 mins away from the campus of SJ. There would be a motorway, freeway or bridge over the water. Lake mille Lacs is a beach area if you see my meaning, there's no bridge over the water, it's flatland with a small beach from what I see on photographs.

I'm looking around Minnesota for a bridge going over water with maybe an embankment beneath the bridge that leads to the water. It would be a significant drop if you were to fall from a bridge. It wouldn't be a lake you could just walk in from a flat ground. It wouldn't be a place people usually explore for leisure. I'll look for some but if there's any that stand out, please let me know.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

It seems like I barely sleep anymore, I've read so much on this case that there's only one avenue I hadn't explored, until today. I began to look at the smiley face killer theory and have to admit that not only does it seem convincing, it seems to explain a lot.

I don't necessarily think there's a friend or two who go about killing people and spraying a smiley face, but I think there's much more to it. All of the missing colleged age males, there's just no way they can't be related. I don't buy it. Some of them may be pure bad luck, sure, but there's too many extremely similar circumstances which suggests they were targeted. I'll post back when I've got something.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Thursday marks 21 years since Guimond was last seen attending a small party on campus with friends in Collegeville, Minnesota. People at the gathering noted Guimond had gotten up and left around midnight without saying anything. It was the last time anyone saw him.

Friends realized something was amiss when he failed to show up for a mock trial debate the following afternoon, and loved ones added it was unusual for Guimond to not be in contact.

Law enforcement searched the campus with the assistance of K9s, while the National Guard combed the terrain. The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension said his car was located on campus, but Guimond was nowhere to be found.

Ahead of the 20th anniversary of Guimond’s disappearance, the popular Netflix series "Unsolved Mysteries" aired an episode featuring new details about the investigation and explored several theories as to why the 20 year old essentially vanished into thin air.

Around the same time, the Stearns County Sheriff’s Office released a collage featuring the pictures of 28 unidentified men that were found on Guimond’s computer. Investigators believed these people could have information about his disappearance and asked the public’s help identifying them.

Josh Guimond’s disappearance: Investigation ongoing after 21 years

Twenty-one years later, Stearns County deputies say they are still actively looking into the disappearance of St. John’s University student Joshua Guimond, who hasn't been seen since leaving a party on the night of Nov. 9, 2002.

www.fox9.com

 

[Marzipan]

It seems like I barely sleep anymore, I've read so much on this case that there's only one avenue I hadn't explored, until today. I began to look at the smiley face killer theory and have to admit that not only does it seem convincing, it seems to explain a lot.

I don't necessarily think there's a friend or two who go about killing people and spraying a smiley face, but I think there's much more to it. All of the missing colleged age males, there's just no way they can't be related. I don't buy it. Some of them may be pure bad luck, sure, but there's too many extremely similar circumstances which suggests they were targeted. I'll post back when I've got something.

Many are related —via alcohol. I work at a University and it just happened again last month. They don’t always drown in the river. Sometimes their alcohol overdose results in their death by other means.
This theory sucked us all I for a while but I’ve let go of it, at least for the most part. Maybe there was one for some victims. You’ve done so much work with these other theories that has so more meat on the bone in terms of motivation and opportunity.