AMBER ALERT WI - Jayme Closs, 13, Barron, missing after parents found shot to death, 15 Oct 2018 *endangered* #7

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
ITA! Maybe the "insider" is *as an example only* a file clerk or FedEx delivery guy. IOW, what FBI agent would say “We know 100 percent that Jayme is still alive.” ?? Um, okay.

And what's with the neighbor? Now she's painting the Closs family as reclusive and unfriendly to the neighbors. I won't quote but you can see her comments here:
The Closs Family Was Reclusive Before Murder: 'They Wouldn't Even Come To The Door'
JS needs to stop giving out interviews. MOO.
Agree. JS was the neighbor first said to provide critical information about the time gunfire heard. However, since then, her accounting has changed a couple of times and now she's giving interviews citing and/reclusive or negative traits about the victims! Seems to me that this witness desires to stay in the press, and her words must be taken with large grains of salt. MOO
 
Last edited:
I have been thinking about the post I wrote earlier and should maybe clarify something. I read a local WI news article that said Jamey's mother had Jamey in some sort of religion classes. I remember reading that she dropped her off at these classes. Drawing on my experience working domestic assault/family violence calls I know some parents lack discipline, some are in between, and some are rather Disciplinarian. "IF" there is any truth to the family being reclusive, was Jamey somewhat sheltered and what was her discipline like?

Is it possible she met someone at a religion class that took an extra liking to her? Is it possible she was somewhat sheltered and had a busy social media life to compensate?

<modsnip - rumor, not from allowed source>

We don't know that the family was "reclusive"; that's just a dumb comment from one neighbor who really didn't seem to know them.
 
I think that there needs to be more tracking on home invasions, because they are becoming increasingly more prevalent and violent.

The problem is how, "Home Invasions" are documented, right now, the definition from the FBI, which tracks Home Invasions, it includes people known and unknown as the definition of "Home Invasion". This situation looks like a possible acquiescence home invasion, the perpetrators knew what they wanted, and knew how to get it. They knew that the home did not have a dog, security system, was isolated, and that the Father was not likely to have a gun handy.

Not unlike the situation with Elizabeth Smart. So, I would look at people who have been in that house in the last year. If the couple is reclusive, that would probably be not that many people.

I remember the issue with Elizabeth Smart kidnapping and Jon Benet murder, that the sheer amount of people who had been in the house or had access to the home, was astronomical.

That really made us think about who we let in our home, casually, and we changed after that. No one comes over any longer, unless it is for a specific purpose, we have no pictures out, doors to rooms are closed, and it is usually people we know personally, even for work in our home. And we do more maintenance ourselves.
 
I wish I knew what type of clothing they all were wearing and what items/clothing Jayme took with her, were they all in "pajamas?" If Dad was in street clothes, he may have just got home from work, but if both parents were in night clothes, they may have been sleeping .... was the bed made/unmade, was Jayme's bed rumpled, etc.? Any sign if a midnight snack? There is so much we do not know that could be helpful. There's a reason some of this is not shared, I imagine.
 
I wish I knew what type of clothing they all were wearing and what items/clothing Jayme took with her, were they all in "pajamas?" If Dad was in street clothes, he may have just got home from work, but if both parents were in night clothes, they may have been sleeping .... was the bed made/unmade, was Jayme's bed rumpled, etc.? Any sign if a midnight snack? There is so much we do not know that could be helpful. There's a reason some of this is not shared, I imagine.
GREAT QUESTIONS!
 
Investigators receive over 1,000 tips in desperate search for Jayme Closs
Someone called 911 from Denise Closs' cellphone that morning just before 1 a.m. local time, and the 911 dispatcher heard "a lot of yelling," according to records from the Barron County Sheriff's Department obtained by ABC News. The dispatcher called the number back but was unable to leave a voicemail.

More attempts were made, and the phone went unanswered. Authorities also tried calling the home's landline but it was disconnected, records show.
 
I apologize if this has been touched upon already. There’s way too much reading for me to be able to catch up.

Earlier it was mentioned that Jayme changed school districts due to her “caregiver” moving. Does she have any sort of special needs, where that caregiver would be a PCA or something of that sort? Or just a babysitter/nanny? Do we have any info/insight on that?

Wondering because special needs, particularly intellectual or autism spectrum, would make her more vulnerable to predators and, likely, danger in general. Also, her maturity level, actual age vs. perceived age, social maturity, ability to gauge social situations, threats, etc. would be affected.

Not that any of this would cause her parents to be shot, but still of interest (to me, anyway) in understanding the whole picture and intricacies of the situation.
 
There has been considerable discussion about the chair that was removed from the house. I don't see any conclusive evidence of blood on the chair when you carefully review the WCCO footage posted on CNN:
Jayme Closs disappearance: New clues from 911 call emerge in case of missing Wisconsin girl - CNN

I shoot and edit videos, and do image retouching for a living. What I do see when reviewing the video on some devices is lower resolution digital artifacting that gives the wood an oversaturated appearance (which could be misinterpreted as blood) in some frames of the video. This is fairly common in digital video. Reviewing the video using my iphone gave me the clearest picture of the video at a higher resolution frame by frame, and IMO there is no visual evidence of blood in that video.

The disussion of someone being tied up to that chair has also been prevalent. When you do a google search "windsor chair seat cushions" or similar searches such as "chair cushions" you'll note that the most common way that they are attached to chair is by two ties in the back. Those ties can be easily seen dangling from the back of this chair in the video. What is a bit more curious is the tie in the front left. It appears to be tied around the front corner of the chair in a different fashion than the others, but does appear to be constructed of the same material as the other two (meaning seat cushion).

JMO but I don't think there's sufficient evidence provided by that video to say conclusively that anyone was tied up on that chair (or that there's blood on it). Wouldn't you need a more complex set of rope and knots to effectively secure someone to that chair? If the chair contained blood with restraints and was critical evidence to the crime scene, would LE want to untie the assembly prior to removing it from the home? MOO
You make good points, Minnphatts. For me I t is very hard to look at the videos “second hand” and be able to discern exactly what you are seeing without equipment that can enhance the video. However, there is some reason that LE decided to remove that particular chair from the scene. It is highly unusual to have a tie on the front of kitchen/dining seat cushions. It is also rather hard to just rip the cushion from the chair leaving the ties behind. Perhaps IF someone had been tied to the chair and IF someone was cut free, the cushion and other ties were bagged into evidence and carried out that way. You do always want to preserve the knot in any bindings recovered from a crime scene. There’s a lot of if, what, maybes, in this case. That’s what keeps us guessing.
 
Hey everyone. I missed a good chunk of the last thread and all of this one so far. Where did the reports of Denise being barricaded in the bathroom come from? I did a quick Google search and found the Radar Online article. Is this the only source for the information? If so, how credible do we think the insider is? Is it common for insiders to speak to the media in cases like this? If this is the only source, I feel like it's super risky for an FBI insider to share information that apparently no one else in the investigation thinks should be public, if only because it could compromise the case somehow. So I'm a bit skeptical of the information if only because of that. Also, if she was barricaded in, how did she get shot? If she had already been shot when she barricaded herself in, I feel like it's odd that she would have been unable to talk on the phone if she had enough strength to barricade the door and then call 911, unless when she made the call, the perp(s) managed to break in and shoot her, with the gunshot being heard over the phone and being why it was assumed a suicide attempt - I've heard of suicidal people calling 911 and then killing themselves without saying anything on the line in order to have their bodies found. Also editing to add a thought: we know there was evidence on the 911 call to suggest Jayme was there. If Denise barricaded herself into the bathroom, I wonder if Jayme was in there with her? It seems like something a mother would do, to try to protect their child during something like this, and then if she was shot, Jayme would have likely screamed or cried out or something, which would have been heard on the call. I'd hate to think that this is the case, that Jayme witnessed what happened, but I feel like it's more likely than her being heard from elsewhere in the house.

Also, the dispatch log says that James "had answered the door". I wonder how they came to that conclusion? Was it just that he was in the doorway and was found in such a position that makes it seem likely, or is there other information to back this up? I know we likely don't know this, but I feel like it could be important. If he actually answered the door, this would make it seem very likely that he knew whomever did this, while if he was just found in a position that makes it seem likely he answered the door, then we can't draw the same conclusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
2,162
Total visitors
2,261

Forum statistics

Threads
599,866
Messages
18,100,384
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top