AMBER ALERT WI - Jayme Closs, 13, Barron, missing after parents found shot, 15 Oct 2018 *endangered* #26

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
SkipperKey3 said:
I think that if they know the type of bullet, which they surely do know, it would be due diligence on the part of LE to canvass any stores that sell that type of bullet and find out if anybody knows anything. I don't think releasing the info to the general public will help if they have already been tracking down that lead without releasing the info, because they will have already talked to local stores about this.
Click to expand...
Police haven't released the type of firearm used that I know of. They might have casings. I guarantee they are running the forensics on any bullets recovered.

When a gun is fired, and the bullet blasts down the barrel, it encounters ridges and grooves that cause it to spin, increasing the accuracy of the shot. Those ridges dig into the soft metal of the bullet, leaving striations. At the same time that the bullet explodes forward, the cartridge case explodes backward with equal force against the mechanism that absorbs the recoil, called the breech face. This stamps an impression of the breech face into the soft metal at the base of the cartridge case, which is then ejected from the gun.

The theory behind firearm identification is that microscopic striations and impressions left on bullets and cartridge cases are unique, reproducible, and therefore, like “ballistic fingerprints” that can be used to identify a gun. If investigators recover bullets or cartridge cases from a crime scene, forensic examiners can test-fire a suspect’s gun to see if it produces ballistic fingerprints that match the evidence. It's not foolproof - and you can get false positives wherein bullets and cartridge cases that are fired from different guns might have similar markings, especially if the guns were consecutively manufactured. That makes using it as evidence problematic.

The biggest ballistic issue with Jayme's case is no gun was found, and I guarantee whoever shot her parents if they have IQ higher than a stump would have cleaned the firearm(s) of prints and then tossed it into a deep body of water or buried it far away.
 
Mistermagoo said:
Here is a link to an Ashley Banfield interview.

CNN.com - Transcripts

This is just the transcript, I don't have the link to the actual interview. The neighbor is interviewed in here. I must say that I agree with Elektroangel's post. Pretty much everything said on that post is how I feel also
Click to expand...

Here's a link to the podcast of that interview:

Hunt For Missing Girl After Parents Killed; Frat Boy Accused Of Rape Set To Walk Free! Crime & Justice With Ashleigh Banfield podcast
 
OhThatVictoria said:
Yes indeed. A full page + of court cases found on the Wisconsin Court Access page. Lots of traffic violations, they arrested him for meth, THC and drug paraphernalia on 10/31 (file date).

His address is 1215 US Hwy 8 and the Closs residence is 1268 US Hwy 8.
Click to expand...
Were there any violent crimes in his history? I think this might have been done by someone who has been exposed to or performed violent acts in the past. This is a pretty gruesome act for someone who has no history of violence to perform and not be affected by and carry out so smoothly. Even if it was someone who had a history of abusing animals or being abused themselves, they would have some exposure to violence. I think for this to be carried out so seamlessly they could not have been affected by the macabe nature of the crime.
 
I was thinking this morning about the railroad tracks behind Jayme's house. We have tracks behind ours in a similar fashion. Too many trees to see the tracks from our house.
It has happened on a couple occasions that family members who live down the road have seen people pop out on the lane that runs across the tracks. Its obvious that they were back there walking behind the houses of the people who live on our road but we don't know what they were doing or how far back there they went. Evidence of people making meth has also been found out in the woods. One of my family members came across it while checking cows and was afraid of calling the police so they left it where it was because it looked like it had been abandoned.
 
Mistermagoo said:
Here is a link to an Ashley Banfield interview.

CNN.com - Transcripts

This is just the transcript, I don't have the link to the actual interview. The neighbor is interviewed in here. I must say that I agree with Elektroangel's post. Pretty much everything said on that post is how I feel also
Click to expand...
The main questions that I have....
1. Fitzgerald refers to Jayme early on as a "missing child" not endangered child or abducted child. "So, you are right, we are investigating two separate crimes, a double homicide and a missing child."
2. BANFIELD: Ok. So often times when a young person goes missing, the digital trail is almost like a popcorn trail, which leads me to the question about Jamie`s social media. 13-year-old girls are almost always on their phones or on some form of social media, I`m guessing, and I think it`s a good guess. You have been blanketing that angle. Have you found any information from her social media? Is it possible she has a phone with her?

FITZGERALD:I do not know the answer to the second part of the question, if she had the phone with her. I can tell you that we are looking at the social media platform.

By this point in the investigation that the interview occured I would think the sheriff knew they had found Jayme's phone charging in the kitchen... so does this mean they don't know if she has a second phone or they didn't want anyone to know they had Jayme's phone.

3. When asked if she was communicating with anyone on social media... Fitzgerald said he didn't believe so but that is also when he went into an explanation of how he could not answer certain questions due to interfereing with the investigation.

4. SMREKAR: They were very quiet people. We only saw them come and go from their home. We took mail up to them that got delivered to us, and they didn`t even want to come to the door. They were just quiet, preferred I guess to be alone. You didn`t see them out in the yard doing anything. At least we didn`t.
So to me this says that their yard may be within sight of the Smrekar's property? So That means that they might have seen headlights if they were on when they left the driveway? I was under the impresion that the houses were a good bit away with trees in between.

5. BANFIELD: Did you ever see Jaime with any friends? Or did she ever come and go and get picked up by friends in vehicles of any kind?

SMREKAR: That I can`t tell you, I just know that the school bus dropped her off?

BANFIELD: And you would see her dropped off daily in front of the house by the school bus?

SMREKAR: Yes.

BANFIELD: But other than that, you didn`t see collections of friends coming and going from that house?

SMREKAR: No. We didn`t even know they had any children. They just weren`t out there doing things.


Why would Smrekar say that they saw Jayme get dropped off every day then a sentance later say that they didn't even know they had children?
 
kkdj said:
BBM
Please explain your thoughts.
Click to expand...

MOO, but I still think it may have been a male and female couple. The female could have knocked on the door, said she had car trouble and her phone was dead. James cracks open the door to see and the male kicks in the door.
 
I’ve been following Aubrey’s case along with Jayme and Hania’s.

Although details haven’t been released yet, Aubrey’s kidnapper traveled from NM to N.C. and appeared to be taking her back to NM. Same with Gypsy Blanchard’s.

I think it’s a very real possibility that the perp came from out of town with this on his mind. Ten years ago, I would have dismissed the thought, but in this day and age it’s more of a possibility.

Also, wondering if they’ve checked some of the social media accounts of Jayme’s friends? I just overheard my 12 year old daughter & friends planning to meet up at the one girl’s house who has an older brother so they can all “talk to his cute friends online”. I was surprised as that had never crossed my mind before.
 
JRW said:
The main questions that I have....
1. Fitzgerald refers to Jayme early on as a "missing child" not endangered child or abducted child. "So, you are right, we are investigating two separate crimes, a double homicide and a missing child."
2. BANFIELD: Ok. So often times when a young person goes missing, the digital trail is almost like a popcorn trail, which leads me to the question about Jamie`s social media. 13-year-old girls are almost always on their phones or on some form of social media, I`m guessing, and I think it`s a good guess. You have been blanketing that angle. Have you found any information from her social media? Is it possible she has a phone with her?

FITZGERALD:I do not know the answer to the second part of the question, if she had the phone with her. I can tell you that we are looking at the social media platform.

By this point in the investigation that the interview occured I would think the sheriff knew they had found Jayme's phone charging in the kitchen... so does this mean they don't know if she has a second phone or they didn't want anyone to know they had Jayme's phone.

3. When asked if she was communicating with anyone on social media... Fitzgerald said he didn't believe so but that is also when he went into an explanation of how he could not answer certain questions due to interfereing with the investigation.

4. SMREKAR: They were very quiet people. We only saw them come and go from their home. We took mail up to them that got delivered to us, and they didn`t even want to come to the door. They were just quiet, preferred I guess to be alone. You didn`t see them out in the yard doing anything. At least we didn`t.
So to me this says that their yard may be within sight of the Smrekar's property? So That means that they might have seen headlights if they were on when they left the driveway? I was under the impresion that the houses were a good bit away with trees in between.

5. BANFIELD: Did you ever see Jaime with any friends? Or did she ever come and go and get picked up by friends in vehicles of any kind?

SMREKAR: That I can`t tell you, I just know that the school bus dropped her off?

BANFIELD: And you would see her dropped off daily in front of the house by the school bus?

SMREKAR: Yes.


BANFIELD: But other than that, you didn`t see collections of friends coming and going from that house?

SMREKAR: No. We didn`t even know they had any children. They just weren`t out there doing things.


Why would Smrekar say that they saw Jayme get dropped off every day then a sentance later say that they didn't even know they had children?
Click to expand...

This is what we were talking about last night in this thread. The neighbors just do not seem to be very consistent with their recollections of that evening. And as I stated before, it does not seem that the sheriff is using the neighbors timeline with their timeline, which he indicated he thought the perps were in and out pretty fast.
Anyways... here is a link which shows you just how far the neighbors driveway is to the Closs's. it comes on at about the :34 mark
 
Irmese said:
MOO, but I still think it may have been a male and female couple. The female could have knocked on the door, said she had car trouble and her phone was dead. James cracks open the door to see and the male kicks in the door.
Click to expand...
But why? There was no robbery, just 2 murders and taking Jayme.
 
JRW said:
The main questions that I have....
1. Fitzgerald refers to Jayme early on as a "missing child" not endangered child or abducted child. "So, you are right, we are investigating two separate crimes, a double homicide and a missing child."
2. BANFIELD: Ok. So often times when a young person goes missing, the digital trail is almost like a popcorn trail, which leads me to the question about Jamie`s social media. 13-year-old girls are almost always on their phones or on some form of social media, I`m guessing, and I think it`s a good guess. You have been blanketing that angle. Have you found any information from her social media? Is it possible she has a phone with her?

FITZGERALD:I do not know the answer to the second part of the question, if she had the phone with her. I can tell you that we are looking at the social media platform.

By this point in the investigation that the interview occured I would think the sheriff knew they had found Jayme's phone charging in the kitchen... so does this mean they don't know if she has a second phone or they didn't want anyone to know they had Jayme's phone.

3. When asked if she was communicating with anyone on social media... Fitzgerald said he didn't believe so but that is also when he went into an explanation of how he could not answer certain questions due to interfereing with the investigation.

4. SMREKAR: They were very quiet people. We only saw them come and go from their home. We took mail up to them that got delivered to us, and they didn`t even want to come to the door. They were just quiet, preferred I guess to be alone. You didn`t see them out in the yard doing anything. At least we didn`t.
So to me this says that their yard may be within sight of the Smrekar's property? So That means that they might have seen headlights if they were on when they left the driveway? I was under the impresion that the houses were a good bit away with trees in between.

5. BANFIELD: Did you ever see Jaime with any friends? Or did she ever come and go and get picked up by friends in vehicles of any kind?

SMREKAR: That I can`t tell you, I just know that the school bus dropped her off?

BANFIELD: And you would see her dropped off daily in front of the house by the school bus?

SMREKAR: Yes.

BANFIELD: But other than that, you didn`t see collections of friends coming and going from that house?

SMREKAR: No. We didn`t even know they had any children. They just weren`t out there doing things.


Why would Smrekar say that they saw Jayme get dropped off every day then a sentance later say that they didn't even know they had children?
Click to expand...
I am thinking that Jayme's bus stop might not have been in front of her house- maybe they thought she was someone else's child on that road? Honestly, I see kids at bus stops around here in the morning- I couldn't tell you who they belong to, as we don't know all of our neighbors around here.
 
Having probs quoting w/my iPad.

I think the neighbors have confused matters with their communication skills. What she means and says are different. I take it to mean that one wouldn’t think they even had children because they were never out in the yard doing things. YET . . . Aerial pics show picnic tables and Denise decorated the exterior of the house AND her sister said that Denise loved her flowers . . . So . . . The neighbors are not the most reliable of witnesses on so many levels.
 
Last edited:
Steelslady said:
I am thinking that Jayme's bus stop might not have been in front of her house- maybe they thought she was someone else's child on that road? Honestly, I see kids at bus stops around here in the morning- I couldn't tell you who they belong to, as we don't know all of our neighbors around here.
Click to expand...

Good thought! Or even if the stop was in front of the Closs house, it could be that the neighbors saw her getting off the bus as they drove past, rather than from the distance of their own home.

They would only have had to see her a few times over the past year or so and it would probably be enough for them to be comfortable saying "we used to see her getting off the bus" -- you don't have to see something every single day to recognize the pattern.

I think she just spoke too casually and meant "we didn't realize they had a child [UNTIL] we saw her getting off the bus"
 
kkdj said:
But why? There was no robbery, just 2 murders and taking Jayme.
Click to expand...
Its kind of occurred to me that LE would not know if something was taken if it wasnt there. For instance, lets say James picked up a big bag of weed that day and thats what the perp came for. How would LE know it was missing if they never knew it was there? Its kind of important because if the parents were the targets it was more than likely due to something shady.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 177 more.
Total: 2,278 (members: 178, guests: 2,100)

Online statistics

Members online
178
Guests online
2,100
Total visitors
2,278
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
600,094
Messages
18,103,620
Members
230,986
Latest member
eluluwho
Back
Top