CO - Jessica Ridgeway, 10, Westminster, 5 Oct 2012 - #10

[DylansMom34]

Most Disney goers enjoy the "magic" that comes from having the various people throughout the resort call you by your names, and, of course this includes their children as well. The timeshare program's slogan is "Welcome home."

While, I can certainly see your hesitation due to being cautious, for a large majority of people who frequent Disney year after year, that "first name" basis for themselves, and their children, is all part of the Magic, and one of the many reasons they return.

Personally, in all of our trips there, I've felt that Disney regarded our Childrens' safety very highly on their lists.

And then there are kids like my son. He has no sensors and will state his first and last name immediately upon meeting someone. We have talked and talked to him about this. Kids are so trusting... ugh

 

[absentia]

oh, thanks for replying, since it was your theory!

But, I'm even more confused now. Why would where her body was found exactly (culvert or hill) make a difference in any aspect of your theory?

do you have any clarifying thoughts on the particulars of your theory that don't connect for me?

All great questions...there are definitely multiple holes in my theory and a lot of pure, blind conjecture. I'm trying to wrap my (somewhat!) rational mind around the mindset of someone who is clearly severely demented. I would imagine that LE has information and evidence that would immediately rule out some of my conclusions...such as whether they believe Jessica's body was initially found in the culvert, or up on the hillside beyond the fence.

 

[Ari]

Jessica Ridgeway Killing: Police Look for Suspect in Two Near-Abductions

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jessica-ri...ect-abductions/story?id=17478819#.UHww9IYlqSo

 

[Jax49]

OT

Here's an intersting article from New Hampshire dated 2008 regarding the state complying with new federal sex offender registery laws.

http://www.eagletribune.com/newhamp...rination-shouldnt-lead-to-sex-offender-status

(snipped)

Starting next year, urinating in public could land you on the sex offender registry.

But two state lawmakers are trying to make sure that doesn't happen.

"People who are caught in a situation of public urination, as part of the complaint they're charged with indecent exposure," said Rep. David Welch, R-Kingston.

This year, that isn't a problem. But starting next year, when New Hampshire complies with a new federal law, anyone convicted of two indecent exposure charges within three years will have to register as a sex offender.

 

[Etilema]

I sure hope nobody starts reporting people as possible suspects based on criteria such as, "I never liked him." If there's real data or information and/or a person's behaviors are distinctly different than before that's one thing and, according to the police, that's valid. But not 'liking' someone is a crappy metric to use.

Especially since most of us have people who don't like US. However, if someone has a hunch about someone based on a gut feeling, they could see if there is any other reason to suspect--such as they didn't go to work that day (since FBI is specifically mentioning that as a sign), or they were out taking photos of kids, or they went away for that weekend to an unknown destination.

JMO

 

[T4Tide]

Thanks for this. First, no one told me that the keys are self-swiped, so I really appreciate that information. However, my daughter (very mildly Autistic) might struggle with swiping a card herself. Therefore, she'd hand it to the employee. She's almost 18 and very independent. I do not want to have to squash that, just because DISNEY thinks it's necessary to have her name on the card. She would never answer (or go with anyone) who says "Hey kid", but she MIGHT if they knew her name. Of course supervision is the best prevention, but she's old enough (and indpendent enough) to do some things alone, with us close by. If they're not using the name for anything, I see absolutely no logical reason why they need it. Disney would now have a database with my children's names, and know which room number we are staying in! I respectfully disagree that this isn't dangerous and entirely unnecessary.

They don't ask for any proof. You could tell them your kids names are Minnie, Mickey, and Donald.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[carbuff]

I'd take LE leaks of any kind with a grain of salt. Here's why.

A few years ago now, we had a serial killer in our area who was abducting streetwalkers from Worcester and dumping them on rural roads not far from us. They arrested someone who was connected to the property where two of the bodies were found.

While the recovery of those first two bodies was going on, of course everybody wanted to know more, and of course LE wasn't giving out details. At that point they didn't have many to give. But several news stations had what was touted as insider information from LE.

Turns out the source was a retired cop who sometimes gets called on when they need extra people to direct traffic. That's as close as he got to the crime scene, directing traffic around the detour while they had the road blocked. He might have heard a thing or two, but mostly he didn't know anything more than the rest of us. But he had a badge so the reporters ate up every word.

 

[Theforeigner]

WY Cody Presser is streaming here NOW!!!

http://www.ktvq.com/pages/ktvq-live-stream/

 

[Gabby66]

I won't take up any more space with my Disney concerns in this thread after this, but I just wanted to say "ICK!!" I don't want ANY strangers feeling like they're on a "first name" basis with my kids - Disney nor otherwise. I also can't see how this procedure can idently "lost children" because I suspect most kids who don't already know their own name, likely won't be carrying around their own key card. While I respect that the first name basis may be "magical" or even "enchanting" to some, I find it very creepy. I'm sad that I find it as such, because I 'get' their intention. In this day and age however, I just find it to be a VERY poor business practice. Thank you to those however, who have commented otherwise, trying to reassure me. I respect your effort, but I stand firm in my opinion that there's NO logical reason to require this. If they made it an option, fine, but they don't. Any child staying on property MUST be listed by name.

 

[Jax49]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/states-dont-meet-federal-sex-offender-laws_n_1941060.html

Nearly three dozen states have failed to meet conditions of a 2006 federal law that requires them to join a nationwide program to track sex offenders, including five states that have completely given up on the effort because of persistent doubts about how it works and how much it costs.

The states, including some of the nation's largest, stand to lose millions of dollars in government grants for law enforcement, but some have concluded that honoring the law would be far more expensive than simply living without the money.

Some lawmakers determined that the program would cost more to implement than to ignore. Others resisted the burden it placed on offenders, especially certain juveniles who would have to be registered for life. In Arizona, for instance, offenders convicted as juveniles can petition for removal after rehabilitation

 

[stealth]

Please report anything suspicious to LE. Westminster Police Ridgeway Case Tip Line: (303) 658-4336 or [email protected] There is NO HARM in reporting something that doesn't seem right. If it is NOTHING, then LE will confirm that it is nothing and life goes on. It is going to be someone who saw or heard something that reports it that will likely lead to this monster being captured. Please don't hesitate to tell what you know. If you are more comfortable, post the details here and one of us will report it.

 

[MisterMayor]

oh, thanks for replying, since it was your theory!

But, I'm even more confused now. Why would where her body was found exactly (culvert or hill) make a difference in any aspect of your theory?

do you have any clarifying thoughts on the particulars of your theory that don't connect for me?

If the body was initially placed in the culvert, I would be less inclined to stick with my theory that both the backpack and body may have been transported to their drop locations via foot, as opposed to by vehicle. Based on the information we have so far, I theorize that this person was intimately familiar with these Open Space areas and felt confident and comfortable navigating them at night - at least more so than he would have if he were in a vehicle. If something goes awry and you're in a car, there is very little you can do...you're confined to the roads. By foot, you can effectively disappear by simply running in any direction at the first flash of headlights. However, if the body was initially placed in the culvert that runs under the road, I would probably re-think that theory.

 

[Shelby2]

I'd take LE leaks of any kind with a grain of salt. Here's why.

A few years ago now, we had a serial killer in our area who was abducting streetwalkers from Worcester and dumping them on rural roads not far from us. They arrested someone who was connected to the property where two of the bodies were found.

While the recovery of those first two bodies was going on, of course everybody wanted to know more, and of course LE wasn't giving out details. At that point they didn't have many to give. But several news stations had what was touted as insider information from LE.

Turns out the source was a retired cop who sometimes gets called on when they need extra people to direct traffic. That's as close as he got to the crime scene, directing traffic around the detour while they had the road blocked. He might have heard a thing or two, but mostly he didn't know anything more than the rest of us. But he had a badge so the reporters ate up every word.

Are you in MA too?

 

[otto]

I'm posting this again as I didn't really get many answers last nite and I'm hoping there are more people on today who might be able to help offer theories. After listening to the crime show last night, there are a couple things about Mister Mayor's theory that don't connect for me. I wonder if anyone can answer these questions in a way that makes sense to me.
TIA

* if it was a "crime of opportunity" and if he simply "snapped", how is it that it was also not random and was well thought out and planned in advance

and how is it that he would have also been fantasizing and repressing this for a long time?

and why is it that he would likely do it again soon? does his GF/wife go away frequently on weekends, as was suggested, to give him more opportunities? does he have Fridays-Sundays off?

if the way the remains were transported and found was simply due to convenience or necessity (for carrying and concealment), is this perp engaged in a sexual motive or a pedophiliac motive prior to the act that causes the remains to be found this way?

"Crime of opportunity" means he was driving along and happened to come across a girl walking alone. If he "snapped" at that same moment that there was a "crime of opportunity", and grabbed Jessica, then he would not have anything with him that would assist in the abduction, murder, or dismemberment. We know that he had dismemberment tools with him after the murder.

If he was alone and snapped, then he would not have been able to shop for a weapon and garbage bags after the abduction. If he had an accomplice, then he would have had the opportunity to shop for those things, but two people abducting a child suggests that it was a hunt, not a crime of opportunity, and that they made a decision to kidnap a child - no snapping involved.

Fantasizing and repressing are consistent with snapping, although I would use a different term than "snapped". I would say that he made a conscious decision to cross the line.

I don't think that we can draw any conclusions about transporting remains. There's no reason to assume that Jessica was murdered at a different location.

Pedophiles are sexually motivated, so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "sexually motivated" or "pedophiliac".

 

[MoonFlwr]

WY Cody Presser is streaming here NOW!!!

http://www.ktvq.com/pages/ktvq-live-stream/

Thank you!

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

We don't have a National public sex offenders register here in Australia. My state has only just got one, and by just I mean only yesterday! It is only for our state, not the whole country and to get the information you have to provide a licence number, address, phone number and email. The results are emailed to you and you have to agree that "you will not publish, distribute or display any photographs or personal information provided by this site without the prior written approval from the Minister for Police" or you face 10 years in jail.

Kinda makes YOU feel like a perp for wanting info of RSO's!:banghead:

 

[stealth]

Does anyone know if the local schools have Columbus Day off?

The local schools had school on Columbus day.

 

[Shelby2]

"Crime of opportunity" means he was driving along and happened to come across a girl walking alone. If he "snapped" at that same moment that there was a "crime of opportunity", and grabbed Jessica, then he would not have anything with him that would assist in the abduction, murder, or dismemberment. We know that he had dismemberment tools with him after the murder.

If he was alone and snapped, then he would not have been able to shop for a weapon and garbage bags after the abduction. If he had an accomplice, then he would have had the opportunity to shop for those things, but two people abducting a child suggests that it was a hunt, not a crime of opportunity, and that they made a decision to kidnap a child - no snapping involved.

Fantasizing and repressing are consistent with snapping, although I would use a different term than "snapped". I would say that he made a conscious decision to cross the line.

I don't think that we can draw any conclusions about transporting remains. There's no reason to assume that Jessica was murdered at a different location.

Pedophiles are sexually motivated, so I'm not sure what you mean when you say "sexually motivated" or "pedophiliac".

Well there was that case, it was mentioned here, where a boy who lived in a Hasidic Jewish community who kidnapped a boy, did not sexually assault him but did dismember him to get rid of the body. I don't know what his motivation for taking him was though. Maybe someone here remembers.

 

[twint4goat]

I sure hope nobody starts reporting people as possible suspects based on criteria such as, "I never liked him." If there's real data or information and/or a person's behaviors are distinctly different than before that's one thing and, according to the police, that's valid. But not 'liking' someone is a crappy metric to use.

It's not that he's a bad person to be around for awhile at social events. It's hard to explain why I don't like him. I've always felt something was off with him. Much the same way I felt about my former boss (Dan Dewild for any locals who are familiar with the case) who is now in jail and awaiting trial for killing his ex wife. It's just a gut feeling I've had since I met him that I can't seem to get rid of.

 

[BlueIris]

well, the investigators have to eat, so being a waitress would mean she might hear some stuff the rest of us do not.

how does the waitress know for sure the person who shared this with her is LE? If this was explained already, sorry, I missed it b/c I'm skipping ahead trying to catch up.

if someone gave me a detailed outline of how the remains were found, knowing that police aren't releasing his info to the public, I'd call it in and speak to the sarg real fast! That person should be stopped from opening his mouth if he is legit LE, b/c he could damage the case! If he isn't legit LE, he could be the real killer for all we know, posing as LE.

Worse, he could be both, LE and the real killer all rolled into one.