TX TX - Jason Landry, 21, enroute from TSU to home, car found crashed at Luling, 14 Dec 2020 #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.

To Note:
KL was asked, “Do we know who he may have been Snapchatting with? Has anyone come forward? Has anyone said they were expecting or received a Snapchat message from Jason?”
KL replied he was not 100% sure but he knows Jason had been Snapchatting with a couple people...he knows one of his friends snapchatted with him that evening...but he doesn’t know if it was during this particular time (at intersection).
KL is unsure whether Jason was sending or receiving a message on Snapchat at that time.
 
diggndeeperstill said:
I didn’t think that applied. This car was not an obstruction to traffic. From my quoted post and the linked article I created a few still shots to show where the car was found.






I learned something here. I honestly did not realize that airbags did not go off with rear end collisions. Spent some time looking at that. And also found that typically they don’t result in severe concussions either. Head injury is off my list of possibilities. Here is a study for that. Is Concussion a Likely Injury Outcome from a Low Speed Read End Collision? | 30 Forensics
I can’t comment with authority on the white marks just noting they are definitely not rusted like all the other damage to the car.
Click to expand...
The only thing is , we don't know if he was traveling low speed and/or if he was rear ended.
Yes, the brunt of the accident affected the rear end of his vehicle, but we don't know he was actually rear ended by another car and we don't know how fast or slow he was traveling.
So, In my mind, a head injury could still have happened, depending on how the accident happened, which we don't know.
 
Rosiebones said:
Maybe he turned off Waze and contacted someone by Snapchat and that person was waiting across the intersection and that person followed him up Salt Flat and they together staged the scene complete with the distribution of clothing and backpack etc. Then that friend picked him up and they left together.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's definitely come to mind for me. Although the one thing that makes me pause is his pet fish. It appeared he cared enough for it to take it with him. He would not have intentionally left it behind to die. While a lot of things are iffy for me, that's one absolute for me. I really don't think he'd want harm to come to his pet fish.
 
happyday said:
I think they absolutely knew they were his clothes. They were near the backpack, and they were an entire outfit down to the underwear—not just a random shirt on the side of the road.
I’m sorry, I didn’t intend to derail the thread on this topic again. I doubt it will help find Jason, but I just think it’s odd they left them in the middle of the road, that’s all. :)
Click to expand...

RBBM. Wait, what? I thought the clothing was not with the backpack. in that body cam footage still they've released, you can see the clothing is far off the distance (has it been stated where the backpack was found in relation to the clothes or accident site?).
 
diggndeeperstill said:
They searched with drones, horses, dogs, men, helicopters, fixed wing aircraft for days with some of the best, Texas Equusearch.
Click to expand...

IMO I get it but this has happened many times that the best of the best are searching and still miss remains, sadly. Maybe it wasn't one of the homes in the immediate vicinity but some type of structure or cover not too far away.
 
SimplyCass said:
RBBM. Wait, what? I thought the clothing was not with the backpack. in that body cam footage still they've released, you can see the clothing is far off the distance (has it been stated where the backpack was found in relation to the clothes or accident site?).
Click to expand...
They were still in proximity to the backpack, just further along the road, you can see both piles in a photograph released with the press statement from LE.
Common sense alone would take one further than the backpack
 
Spartygirl said:
The only thing is , we don't know if he was traveling low speed and/or if he was rear ended.
Yes, the brunt of the accident affected the rear end of his vehicle, but we don't know he was actually rear ended by another car and we don't know how fast or slow he was traveling.
So, In my mind, a head injury could still have happened, depending on how the accident happened, which we don't know.
Click to expand...

We do know if we believe LE. LE stated that it appeared to be a 1-person crash, no other cars involved. My guess is he was going faster than he should be going on a gravel road or there'd have been less damage to the car if it slowly drifted. MOO

The sheriff's office said the crash only involved his own vehicle, and it was likely caused from overcorrecting on the gravel road and spinning off the roadway. His rear, driver's side corner struck a tree on the east side of the roadway, spinning the front driver's side into another tree and a barbed-wire fence. His rear window was broken from the impact.
 
Gemmie said:
I went to go educate myself on dog tracking and found out there is tracking and trailing. One (usually?) has the handler pulling the dogs nose back on the trail. The other allowing the dog to sniff wherever it wants. For instance, if someone being tracked went east, circled around, but was now west of you... the dog can smell their scent off the wind so it seems to me like it's best to let the dog sniff where it wants, and not just force its nose onto the path.

It also says that it's easier to track on soft surfaces versus paved. We all know that the area Jason's car was found wasn't paved, it was all soft ground so this is supposed to be easier for the dog. Also this is out in the country, not in the middle of NYC where numerous scents could make tracking more difficult. Which makes me question this again... why did the track abruptly stop? Especially since it seems like it was one of the better surfaces to track. I wonder what method was used? Using the lead to force the dogs nose onto the path the human (who can't smell as well as a dog) thinks the dog needs to stay focused on? What if the dog is thinking... 'Tracker dude... I smell him over there. Quit yanking my dang nose down! I'm ONTO something here and it's no longer strongest right under my nose!'.

And yes, the tracking people are experts in this matter, but the article raises a really good point....

If the dog's nose strayed from the prescribed height above the track, his nose was promptly forced back into it without anyone ever examining the reasons for the behavioral change. It was automatically presumed that the dog was outside of odor. Many people believe that the dog must be within inches of the track to actually smell the odor. I believe that perception comes from our own scent-limited world and false rationalization. Nothing could be further from the truth, and simple tests have proven time and again that most dogs can detect odor from a fixed location and at a variety of distances — from inches to yards and more. Consider this question: if it is proven that a dog can detect odor from either ground disturbance or from the human that created it, and from more than mere inches of the physical track, why must a dog's nose be forced into said track?

Makes me more curious about how the tracking was done, and how exactly the handlers handled the dogs. Only one way to know and that would have been to witness it yourself.

Complete (and very interesting) article below. It's from a Police K-9 training site.

Trailing versus tracking: The keys to success
Click to expand...
Thanks for this bit of research. Maybe I missed it, but did they ever say what scents the dog(s) were trained on? There's no mention of clothes from the car and the only other clothes were the ones in the road that JL was likely wearing that night. These were I think initially collected by KL before being returned to LE so not sure if these were used or would even be useful at that point. I guess there's also the ball cap that LE collected with the backpack, plus the backpack itself.
 
The clothes he was wearing were left on the road and there is no report of any other clothing in the car but he was going home for the holidays. He would have been going to services, seeing friends, his sister was coming home but he had no clothes with him?
 
Spartygirl said:
The only thing is , we don't know if he was traveling low speed and/or if he was rear ended.
Yes, the brunt of the accident affected the rear end of his vehicle, but we don't know he was actually rear ended by another car and we don't know how fast or slow he was traveling.
So, In my mind, a head injury could still have happened, depending on how the accident happened, which we don't know.
Click to expand...
Don't let the title of the study fool you. It gives stats on all rear-end collisions which is what is suspected here.
 
Rosiebones said:
The clothes he was wearing were left on the road and there is no report of any other clothing in the car but he was going home for the holidays. He would have been going to services, seeing friends, his sister was coming home but he had no clothes with him?
Click to expand...

Right. And... just shorts and a t-shirt?

What about his glasses?
 
Rosiebones said:
The clothes he was wearing were left on the road and there is no report of any other clothing in the car but he was going home for the holidays. He would have been going to services, seeing friends, his sister was coming home but he had no clothes with him?
Click to expand...
renarde said:
Right. And... just shorts and a t-shirt?

What about his glasses?
Click to expand...
Good question. He may have been wearing contacts. He had no glasses on in the photos taken in San Marcos right before he left.

As for clothes, he likely still had some at his parents' place, especially more formal ones for services. But it's kind of odd to not at least bring a basket of dirty clothes home for the holidays.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 47 more.
Total: 2,119 (members: 48, guests: 2,071)

Online statistics

Members online
48
Guests online
2,071
Total visitors
2,119
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
602,009
Messages
18,133,189
Members
231,206
Latest member
habitsofwaste
Back
Top