FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #12

[htiff]

The new unconcealed episode potentially puts Jen at another complex around 10:30 that Monday night. I have no doubt who the other male was at the scene.

Do you mean Unconcluded? Or is there another podcast?

 

[Rust Cohle]

Do you mean Unconcluded? Or is there another podcast?

Unconcluded

 

[kemo]

A strict application of Occam's Razor would lead to the most likely explanation being an abduction in the morning utilizing her car as transport. The car would have been left at the nearby condo complex because the abductor had left his own car at or near her condo (possibly he lived or worked there).

This explanation does not require staging the condo to create the appearance that she left that morning as if she were on her way to work. The condition of her apartment is just not consistent with an evening abduction. While some features such as the wet towels could have occurred if the perpetrator took a shower and otherwise cleaned up that morning, other features like the unmade bed, pajamas on the floor and the missing phones, briefcase and purse point to a deliberate effort to created the impression of a routine morning exit. The strongest evidence that she left in the morning to go to work is the outfits she had left out and the missing pair of shoes that would have gone with those outfits. This is just too subtle. No guy would have thought of such a ploy. Jen's mother reported that she had a new pair of brown "pumps" and she was figuring out what she was going to wear with them ( women really do discuss these things with their mothers or their friends). The brown pumps were missing as was most likely an outfit that went with them. I just don't believe some guy would have thought to take those brown pumps as any kind of attempt at staging. If the witness from the podcast really did see her wearing a tank top and sweets, she certainly wasn't wearing those shoe and if she was somehow out on an evening rendezvous, brown pumps don't seem appropriate either ( anyone, am I right?).

If the phones were both really turned off at 10:40 PM, I would have to re-think this, but otherwise everything points towards an AM abduction.

The abduction of a low risk woman such as Jen is very rare, whether it is at her vehicle or anywhere else. This was not a crime of opportunity, this was well planned out. The perpetrator knew there wouldn't be people around when she left for work. Jennifer had not left her apartment for work in several days. It make me wonder how he knew she would be back Tuesday. Perhaps he had been waiting there Friday and Monday, perhaps he had some inside knowledge of her schedule. Maybe he just got lucky.

Using the victim's vehicle is not that unusual. He could have used a gun. If this is what happened, I am surprised that Jen drove as instructed. I suspect that the abductor was able to convince her that she wouldn't be hurt if she went along with him. Did she know him?

The perp must have planned where to take her and how he was going to dispose of her body when he was done. I think his returning the car at 12:00 gives us a pretty good idea how long the whole process took.

We know that Jen filled her tank Monday morning before she left Ft Laterdale and first drove to her job in Orlando and then to her condo. The police claim that based on the gas used, her car had not been driven far after that. We not know how much gas had been used or how accurately it had been measured so we have no idea how far away she may have been driven but the working assumption seems to be that she did not leave the immediate Orlando area. There is lots of undeveloped land but it is unlikely that someone would bury a body or otherwise make a serious effort to make sure it was never found unless that person was pretty confident nobody would stumble upon the scene.

If a suspect is identified, i would want to know what vacant land did he have access to?

 

[marable]

I agree about people coming out of the woodwork, but it is a cold case now, and I find it less likely someone would make a story up after this much time and more likely someone misremebered. With that being said, I do believe her, and it gives much more weight to a night abduction as the baseless pings now have credence. Jen being pulled from passenger to the rear lines up her flip-flops being on the passenger floor. Being in pajamas lines up with having maybe laid in bed for a short time, there is no evidence to suggest she brought her briefase in from the car that day, and it's possible both phones were thrown in her purse that night before she left the condo.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

I believe "Erica" as well....Why would she make this up....I would definitely remember something that disturbing 11 years later.....All of these reported sightings of Jennifer cannot be false....

 

[htiff]

A strict application of Occam's Razor would lead to the most likely explanation being an abduction in the morning utilizing her car as transport. The car would have been left at the nearby condo complex because the abductor had left his own car at or near her condo (possibly he lived or worked there).

This explanation does not require staging the condo to create the appearance that she left that morning as if she were on her way to work. The condition of her apartment is just not consistent with an evening abduction. While some features such as the wet towels could have occurred if the perpetrator took a shower and otherwise cleaned up that morning, other features like the unmade bed, pajamas on the floor and the missing phones, briefcase and purse point to a deliberate effort to created the impression of a routine morning exit. The strongest evidence that she left in the morning to go to work is the outfits she had left out and the missing pair of shoes that would have gone with those outfits. This is just too subtle. No guy would have thought of such a ploy. Jen's mother reported that she had a new pair of brown "pumps" and she was figuring out what she was going to wear with them ( women really do discuss these things with their mothers or their friends). The brown pumps were missing as was most likely an outfit that went with them. I just don't believe some guy would have thought to take those brown pumps as any kind of attempt at staging. If the witness from the podcast really did see her wearing a tank top and sweets, she certainly wasn't wearing those shoe and if she was somehow out on an evening rendezvous, brown pumps don't seem appropriate either ( anyone, am I right?).

If the phones were both really turned off at 10:40 PM, I would have to re-think this, but otherwise everything points towards an AM abduction.

The abduction of a low risk woman such as Jen is very rare, whether it is at her vehicle or anywhere else. This was not a crime of opportunity, this was well planned out. The perpetrator knew there wouldn't be people around when she left for work. Jennifer had not left her apartment for work in several days. It make me wonder how he knew she would be back Tuesday. Perhaps he had been waiting there Friday and Monday, perhaps he had some inside knowledge of her schedule. Maybe he just got lucky.

Using the victim's vehicle is not that unusual. He could have used a gun. If this is what happened, I am surprised that Jen drove as instructed. I suspect that the abductor was able to convince her that she wouldn't be hurt if she went along with him. Did she know him?

The perp must have planned where to take her and how he was going to dispose of her body when he was done. I think his returning the car at 12:00 gives us a pretty good idea how long the whole process took.

We know that Jen filled her tank Monday morning before she left Ft Laterdale and first drove to her job in Orlando and then to her condo. The police claim that based on the gas used, her car had not been driven far after that. We not know how much gas had been used or how accurately it had been measured so we have no idea how far away she may have been driven but the working assumption seems to be that she did not leave the immediate Orlando area. There is lots of undeveloped land but it is unlikely that someone would bury a body or otherwise make a serious effort to make sure it was never found unless that person was pretty confident nobody would stumble upon the scene.

If a suspect is identified, i would want to know what vacant land did he have access to?

Makes sense.

 

[rd_jfc]

A strict application of Occam's Razor would lead to the most likely explanation being an abduction in the morning utilizing her car as transport. The car would have been left at the nearby condo complex because the abductor had left his own car at or near her condo (possibly he lived or worked there).

This explanation does not require staging the condo to create the appearance that she left that morning as if she were on her way to work. The condition of her apartment is just not consistent with an evening abduction. While some features such as the wet towels could have occurred if the perpetrator took a shower and otherwise cleaned up that morning, other features like the unmade bed, pajamas on the floor and the missing phones, briefcase and purse point to a deliberate effort to created the impression of a routine morning exit. The strongest evidence that she left in the morning to go to work is the outfits she had left out and the missing pair of shoes that would have gone with those outfits. This is just too subtle. No guy would have thought of such a ploy. Jen's mother reported that she had a new pair of brown "pumps" and she was figuring out what she was going to wear with them ( women really do discuss these things with their mothers or their friends). The brown pumps were missing as was most likely an outfit that went with them. I just don't believe some guy would have thought to take those brown pumps as any kind of attempt at staging. If the witness from the podcast really did see her wearing a tank top and sweets, she certainly wasn't wearing those shoe and if she was somehow out on an evening rendezvous, brown pumps don't seem appropriate either ( anyone, am I right?).

If the phones were both really turned off at 10:40 PM, I would have to re-think this, but otherwise everything points towards an AM abduction.

The abduction of a low risk woman such as Jen is very rare, whether it is at her vehicle or anywhere else. This was not a crime of opportunity, this was well planned out. The perpetrator knew there wouldn't be people around when she left for work. Jennifer had not left her apartment for work in several days. It make me wonder how he knew she would be back Tuesday. Perhaps he had been waiting there Friday and Monday, perhaps he had some inside knowledge of her schedule. Maybe he just got lucky.

Using the victim's vehicle is not that unusual. He could have used a gun. If this is what happened, I am surprised that Jen drove as instructed. I suspect that the abductor was able to convince her that she wouldn't be hurt if she went along with him. Did she know him?

The perp must have planned where to take her and how he was going to dispose of her body when he was done. I think his returning the car at 12:00 gives us a pretty good idea how long the whole process took.

We know that Jen filled her tank Monday morning before she left Ft Laterdale and first drove to her job in Orlando and then to her condo. The police claim that based on the gas used, her car had not been driven far after that. We not know how much gas had been used or how accurately it had been measured so we have no idea how far away she may have been driven but the working assumption seems to be that she did not leave the immediate Orlando area. There is lots of undeveloped land but it is unlikely that someone would bury a body or otherwise make a serious effort to make sure it was never found unless that person was pretty confident nobody would stumble upon the scene.

If a suspect is identified, i would want to know what vacant land did he have access to?

This is an excellent analysis, kemo, but I will repose my caveats. I pose a general challenge, what was missing that would have been in her car only if she were on her way to work Tuesday morning?

The shoes are mentioned. I gather unauthoratatively (and seeking authoritative clarification) that Jennifer obtained those shoes recently and mentioned them to her family, and that she was known to carry shoes in a case and change shoes from driving to go into work, and that she she didn't necessarily carry this case in each night coming home from work. This case would also be one of the missing items I presume.

It is an opinion I expressed earlier that she would have taken these shoes with her to her long weekend island trip, that they would be in her car Monday, and that a pair of shoes would eb expected to be in a case in her car and missing. I do not attribute a missing new pair of shoes as something she did not take with her on her trip, did not wear Monday, but decided to take these shoes to work on Tuesday and therefore she was headed to work. It is in fact the weakest argument that she was headed to work that exists.

The bed is hardly a description of "unmade". It had several outfits laying on it. Yes, it appears at a minimum that she lounged on one side of it while on the phone, but again clothes laying on the bed are not any more a sign that she laid these clothes out Tuesday morning than she laid them out Monday night.

There is the additional factor of coming home from a long trip. She did not unpack Monday night, her bags were said to be by her door, but I would expect some activity Monday evening in the line of clothes, etc.

The remainder concerning shower artifacts can be summed up as a belief she took showers in mornings, not evenings, and furthermore a fervent belief she would not go back outside after her phone call with her bf. Yet if she did go somewhere however close by and brief she intended, it is likely she would have taken a shower first.

What I see is justification of a belief by loved ones that she was headed out the door to work Tuesday morning with no actual firm indication that that happened. It is based simply on the belief she didn't leave her condo after 10 and that everything seen is from Tuesday morning.

If there is anything very likely to have not been in her car and missing unless she was on her way to work Tuesday morning, then that would be a very positive reinforcement of that belief. The new shoes definitely do not fit that bill.

 

[Rust Cohle]

A strict application of Occam's Razor would lead to the most likely explanation being an abduction in the morning utilizing her car as transport. The car would have been left at the nearby condo complex because the abductor had left his own car at or near her condo (possibly he lived or worked there).

This explanation does not require staging the condo to create the appearance that she left that morning as if she were on her way to work. The condition of her apartment is just not consistent with an evening abduction. While some features such as the wet towels could have occurred if the perpetrator took a shower and otherwise cleaned up that morning, other features like the unmade bed, pajamas on the floor and the missing phones, briefcase and purse point to a deliberate effort to created the impression of a routine morning exit. The strongest evidence that she left in the morning to go to work is the outfits she had left out and the missing pair of shoes that would have gone with those outfits. This is just too subtle. No guy would have thought of such a ploy. Jen's mother reported that she had a new pair of brown "pumps" and she was figuring out what she was going to wear with them ( women really do discuss these things with their mothers or their friends). The brown pumps were missing as was most likely an outfit that went with them. I just don't believe some guy would have thought to take those brown pumps as any kind of attempt at staging. If the witness from the podcast really did see her wearing a tank top and sweets, she certainly wasn't wearing those shoe and if she was somehow out on an evening rendezvous, brown pumps don't seem appropriate either ( anyone, am I right?).

If the phones were both really turned off at 10:40 PM, I would have to re-think this, but otherwise everything points towards an AM abduction.

The abduction of a low risk woman such as Jen is very rare, whether it is at her vehicle or anywhere else. This was not a crime of opportunity, this was well planned out. The perpetrator knew there wouldn't be people around when she left for work. Jennifer had not left her apartment for work in several days. It make me wonder how he knew she would be back Tuesday. Perhaps he had been waiting there Friday and Monday, perhaps he had some inside knowledge of her schedule. Maybe he just got lucky.

Using the victim's vehicle is not that unusual. He could have used a gun. If this is what happened, I am surprised that Jen drove as instructed. I suspect that the abductor was able to convince her that she wouldn't be hurt if she went along with him. Did she know him?

The perp must have planned where to take her and how he was going to dispose of her body when he was done. I think his returning the car at 12:00 gives us a pretty good idea how long the whole process took.

We know that Jen filled her tank Monday morning before she left Ft Laterdale and first drove to her job in Orlando and then to her condo. The police claim that based on the gas used, her car had not been driven far after that. We not know how much gas had been used or how accurately it had been measured so we have no idea how far away she may have been driven but the working assumption seems to be that she did not leave the immediate Orlando area. There is lots of undeveloped land but it is unlikely that someone would bury a body or otherwise make a serious effort to make sure it was never found unless that person was pretty confident nobody would stumble upon the scene.

If a suspect is identified, i would want to know what vacant land did he have access to?

With the exception of the eye witness account, I agree there is more evidence, and makes more sense that a morning abduction occurred. I don't buy into cell phones being powered off as an abnormal thing without any other evidence to place along side of it.. I don't buy into the belief that the condo was staged, or this was a highly planned abduction.

But..An eye witness account with siding with offsite pings, and powering off of phones is compelling.

This is an excellent analysis, kemo, but I will repose my caveats. I pose a general challenge, what was missing that would have been in her car only if she were on her way to work Tuesday morning?

The shoes are mentioned. I gather unauthoratatively (and seeking authoritative clarification) that Jennifer obtained those shoes recently and mentioned them to her family, and that she was known to carry shoes in a case and change shoes from driving to go into work, and that she she didn't necessarily carry this case in each night coming home from work. This case would also be one of the missing items I presume.

It is an opinion I expressed earlier that she would have taken these shoes with her to her long weekend island trip, that they would be in her car Monday, and that a pair of shoes would eb expected to be in a case in her car and missing. I do not attribute a missing new pair of shoes as something she did not take with her on her trip, did not wear Monday, but decided to take these shoes to work on Tuesday and therefore she was headed to work. It is in fact the weakest argument that she was headed to work that exists.

The bed is hardly a description of "unmade". It had several outfits laying on it. Yes, it appears at a minimum that she lounged on one side of it while on the phone, but again clothes laying on the bed are not any more a sign that she laid these clothes out Tuesday morning than she laid them out Monday night.

There is the additional factor of coming home from a long trip. She did not unpack Monday night, her bags were said to be by her door, but I would expect some activity Monday evening in the line of clothes, etc.

The remainder concerning shower artifacts can be summed up as a belief she took showers in mornings, not evenings, and furthermore a fervent belief she would not go back outside after her phone call with her bf. Yet if she did go somewhere however close by and brief she intended, it is likely she would have taken a shower first.

What I see is justification of a belief by loved ones that she was headed out the door to work Tuesday morning with no actual firm indication that that happened. It is based simply on the belief she didn't leave her condo after 10 and that everything seen is from Tuesday morning.

If there is anything very likely to have not been in her car and missing unless she was on her way to work Tuesday morning, then that would be a very positive reinforcement of that belief. The new shoes definitely do not fit that bill.

For me, the shoes are a big deal. Where are they? There is so much circumstantial evidence to suggest a morning abduction that the shoes should be accounted for if this occured at night, right? Why toss her shoes, but leave the flip-flops? Maybe all this can be explained by her actually seeing another guy, at another complex, and things escalated. Brought the over night bag to his place.

 

[rd_jfc]

For me, the shoes are a big deal. Where are they? There is so much circumstantial evidence to suggest a morning abduction that the shoes should be accounted for if this occured at night, right? Why toss her shoes, but leave the flip-flops? Maybe all this can be explained by her actually seeing another guy, at another complex, and things escalated. Brought the over night bag to his place.

It has been said that she was known to keep shoes she was wearing to work in a briefcase (along with other items) and that she didn't necessarily carry this briefcase in from her car each evening. I'm assuming there's some validity to this information, I didn't see anyone indicate otherwise.

 

[liz b.]

New to the forum for this heartbreaking case, please excuse me if I am going over much discussed material...on ID Disappeared I saw that there were workmen actually doing work inside JK's condo ? Her father said that she would go home at lunchtime to view the work, and he said that she always stood in the doorway, door open, and was always on her phone when she went home at lunchtime. she was so cautious... Given that : JK had mentioned that some of the workmen catcalled her, and made comments about her, and JK's mother mentioned that she was uncomfortable with the way that the workmen looked at her, and that some of the workers were living temporarily in the vacant apartments, well, it kind of adds up for me. jmo

I was startled when JK's father said that one of the workmen told him that JK said he should just lock up when they left. Her father said that JK had not ever said this...on the face of it this is a glaring inconsistency. It is an interesting path to follow jmo

I admire JK's parents very much. Hoping this can still be solved.

 

[htiff]

New to the forum for this heartbreaking case, please excuse me if I am going over much discussed material...on ID Disappeared I saw that there were workmen actually doing work inside JK's condo ? Her father said that she would go home at lunchtime to view the work, and he said that she always stood in the doorway, door open, and was always on her phone when she went home at lunchtime. she was so cautious... Given that : JK had mentioned that some of the workmen catcalled her, and made comments about her, and JK's mother mentioned that she was uncomfortable with the way that the workmen looked at her, and that some of the workers were living temporarily in the vacant apartments, well, it kind of adds up for me. jmo

I was startled when JK's father said that one of the workmen told him that JK said he should just lock up when they left. Her father said that JK had not ever said this...on the face of it this is a glaring inconsistency. It is an interesting path to follow jmo

I admire JK's parents very much. Hoping this can still be solved.

Liz if you are new to this, I found the Unconcluded Podcast to be a great refresher. It goes over the old evidence and some new. And gives a very comprehensive account of the events.

http://unconcluded.com/

 

[PURSUIT OF JUSTICE]

to me the poi looks like your average "rebel" or cholo gang member from the mid 90s to early 2000's as far as style goes, even the way it looks like he is walking. I don't know much about the styles in Florida, but this style was popular with rebels and also gang culture. Guessing he is my age now, and in that picture 24 or 25, that or what has been said, worked in construction and was wearing throw-away clothing.

see this search

https://www.google.com/search?q=cho...BigB&biw=1024&bih=555#tbm=isch&q=cholo+khakis

 

[kemo]

It has been said that she was known to keep shoes she was wearing to work in a briefcase (along with other items) and that she didn't necessarily carry this briefcase in from her car each evening. I'm assuming there's some validity to this information, I didn't see anyone indicate otherwise.

I stand by my assertion that there was no staging involving her clothes and her shoes. The two outfits were laid out on the bed by Jen and she had the brown pumps with her when she disappeared. I had not considered the possibility that she had worn those pumps to work Monday (she would have had them with her when she left Ft. Lauderdale) and she took them off when she left work and put them in her brief case or otherwise left them in her car with the expectation that she would wear something that would go with them the next day.

The big question is: what did she wear to work Monday, did the brown pumps go with it? We know the outfit she wore to work Monday was laid over a chair in her condo but I can not find what it was.

 

[htiff]

to me the poi looks like your average "rebel" or cholo gang member from the mid 90s to early 2000's as far as style goes, even the way it looks like he is walking. I don't know much about the styles in Florida, but this style was popular with rebels and also gang culture. Guessing he is my age now, and in that picture 24 or 25, that or what has been said, worked in construction and was wearing throw-away clothing.

see this search

https://www.google.com/search?q=cho...BigB&biw=1024&bih=555#tbm=isch&q=cholo+khakis

The hair style is still popular-and crosses cultures. It can be called a modern-day pompadour, or "mohawk", but not a punk-styled mohawk. It's actually a look that is sported by men who take some care in their appearance, because you really can't attain the look without hairspray.

I do remember seeing this look a lot in Miami and NY in the late '90s especially. But just the other day I saw a kid sporting it, and he couldn't have been more than 15.

If that is hair, then I think it gives some info about the POI. This is a guy who cared about his appearance. He was careful in how he left the car, and apparently took time to wipe it down to avoid leaving fingerprints. He may be young, but he is somewhat organized--and if the scent dogs got it right, he returned to the Mosaic.

So we aren't looking for a homeless person, or a heavy drug user...but it would seem that he is aware of how criminal procedure enough to know how to place evidence and make certain he can't be linked to that evidence, directly. Chances seem good, this wasn't his first crime.

 

[htiff]

One of the big questions I have had regarding this case is, why move Jennifer's car at all?

The gas level was such that it is believed that the car didn't go far, as in, it does not appear that someone drove the car some distance and then returned to the area.

If person/s who did this are not associated in anyway with the Mosaic, and the car isn't the object of the crime, why not just leave it? What reason would there be to move it?

It could be that those involved in this had no vehicle, and held Jennifer at gunpoint, but then why not keep the car? Change the plates? Sell it for parts?

And why is the car moved when it is?

 

[marable]

I stand by my assertion that there was no staging involving her clothes and her shoes. The two outfits were laid out on the bed by Jen and she had the brown pumps with her when she disappeared. I had not considered the possibility that she had worn those pumps to work Monday (she would have had them with her when she left Ft. Lauderdale) and she took them off when she left work and put them in her brief case or otherwise left them in her car with the expectation that she would wear something that would go with them the next day.

The big question is: what did she wear to work Monday, did the brown pumps go with it? We know the outfit she wore to work Monday was laid over a chair in her condo but I can not find what it was.

The clothes that she wore on Monday were draped over the back of a chair in her bedroom...The clothes if I recall were mostly beige so her shoes would have gone with that outfit....

 

[JnRyan]

One of the big questions I have had regarding this case is, why move Jennifer's car at all?

The gas level was such that it is believed that the car didn't go far, as in, it does not appear that someone drove the car some distance and then returned to the area.

If person/s who did this are not associated in anyway with the Mosaic, and the car isn't the object of the crime, why not just leave it? What reason would there be to move it?

It could be that those involved in this had no vehicle, and held Jennifer at gunpoint, but then why not keep the car? Change the plates? Sell it for parts?

And why is the car moved when it is?

If Jennifer was abducted using the abductor's (abductors'?) vehicle such a van, then moving the car is a definite risk and, yes, I don't understand that part either in that scenario. It would lead me to believe Jennifer's own car was used. Except we've heard nothing from LE about any forensic evidence in the trunk and I would think that would be best way to transport her. Otherwise, she might risk jumping out at a stoplight. And if forensic evidence was found in any quantity why then didn't LE not keep the car? I believe it is the Brianna Maitland case in Vermont where LE STILL has her car.

When the information first came out that the Kesse's arrived around 1 PM at the condos I thought maybe the POI may have driven past and saw activity at her condo so he continued on HOTG to park the car as a Plan B. Now we know the Kesse's arrived around 3 PM or 3 hours after the POI parks the car.

This now make me think the POI planned to use HOTG. He either knew that apartment complex or scouted it out if this was planned in advance. It makes wonder if the POI would have been recognized at Jennifer's condos and that is reason for parking at HOTG and walking back. I wish LE had released the surveillance video earlier and used it in talking to the residents in HOTG. There were no smart phones then to show videos, but there were laptop computers that could have been used to show the video. Had it been done while it was fresh on everyone's mind then it might have had a better chance of success.

 

[htiff]

If Jennifer was abducted using the abductor's (abductors'?) vehicle such a van, then moving the car is a definite risk and, yes, I don't understand that part either in that scenario. It would lead me to believe Jennifer's own car was used. Except we've heard nothing from LE about any forensic evidence in the trunk and I would think that would be best way to transport her. Otherwise, she might risk jumping out at a stoplight. And if forensic evidence was found in any quantity why then didn't LE not keep the car? I believe it is the Brianna Maitland case in Vermont where LE STILL has her car.

When the information first came out that the Kesse's arrived around 1 PM at the condos I thought maybe the POI may have driven past and saw activity at her condo so he continued on HOTG to park the car as a Plan B. Now we know the Kesse's arrived around 3 PM or 3 hours after the POI parks the car.

This now make me think the POI planned to use HOTG. He either knew that apartment complex or scouted it out if this was planned in advance. It makes wonder if the POI would have been recognized at Jennifer's condos and that is reason for parking at HOTG and walking back. I wish LE had released the surveillance video earlier and used it in talking to the residents in HOTG. There were no smart phones then to show videos, but there were laptop computers that could have been used to show the video. Had it been done while it was fresh on everyone's mind then it might have had a better chance of success.

All good points, and this makes a lot of sense.

My memory is that there were no usable prints in Kesse's car, which is why LE believes that the time the POI spends in that car after parking, may have been to wipe away prints.

We don't know if there was DNA from someone other than Kesse found, though. (there could be holdback info)

There were no obvious signs that a struggle had taken place in the car, either.

If Jennifer was abducted at gunpoint, it's hard to imagine more than one assailant, because there is a DVD player left in the back seat that was apparently undisturbed, so the person with the gun would have been in the passenger seat--in theory. Maybe someone else could have gotten into the backseat and just didn't touch the DVD player--but this seems unlikely.

So is this a lone perp?

Whether Jennifer was abducted at night, or in the morning--if her car is used to abduct her, whoever did this, did not go far, either with her, or to dispose of the car. (The gas usage reported very much indicates that no great distance was traveled in that car from the point she gassed up on Monday morning.)

So either, something was done to Jennifer very close to where she lived, or there is another vehicle involved. Regardless of a night or morning abduction theory--this still begs the question, why was Jennifer's car moved when it was? And why was it moved so close by?

I've read a few timelines on when the family first notified Mosaic management about Jennifer--and this was a few hours before the family arrives on site. Management went to Jennifer's apartment sometime around noonish, and they said at that time the car wasn't there.

But her car is being parked at HOTG right around this time.

Puzzling.

 

[rd_jfc]

I stand by my assertion that there was no staging involving her clothes and her shoes. The two outfits were laid out on the bed by Jen and she had the brown pumps with her when she disappeared. I had not considered the possibility that she had worn those pumps to work Monday (she would have had them with her when she left Ft. Lauderdale) and she took them off when she left work and put them in her brief case or otherwise left them in her car with the expectation that she would wear something that would go with them the next day.

The big question is: what did she wear to work Monday, did the brown pumps go with it? We know the outfit she wore to work Monday was laid over a chair in her condo but I can not find what it was.

What I said involved no staging, and I still haven't heard from anyone what is missing that would only be in her car going to work Tuesday morning. Monday she would be wearing something that she took on her trip. If there is any credence to keeping a pair of heels in her briefcase and the briefcase often left in the car, then that implies she didn't wear different shoes every day based on outfit.

I would say I'm sure that Jennifer took her new very nice looking shoes on the trip because that's why people buy new shoes, and they would either be in her unpacked bags or she wore them Monday. And if they're missing that's all it tells us, tells us nothing about indicating she headed out the door to work Tuesday morning because they're missing.

 

[kemo]

What I said involved no staging, and I still haven't heard from anyone what is missing that would only be in her car going to work Tuesday morning. Monday she would be wearing something that she took on her trip. If there is any credence to keeping a pair of heels in her briefcase and the briefcase often left in the car, then that implies she didn't wear different shoes every day based on outfit.

I would say I'm sure that Jennifer took her new very nice looking shoes on the trip because that's why people buy new shoes, and they would either be in her unpacked bags or she wore them Monday. And if they're missing that's all it tells us, tells us nothing about indicating she headed out the door to work Tuesday morning because they're missing.

If Jen wore the same shoes Monday she intended to wear Tuesday and if she were in the habit of leaving her shoes and briefcase in her care overnight, this does open the possibility of a PM abduction.

Her bed appeared "slept in" (not just laid upon). It is pretty hard to stage a bed to appear slept in but she could have gone to bed and then woken up and was lured out. There were two outfits laid out on the side of the bed she did not sleep on. They could certainly have been put there that evening.

The dampness in the shower stall sure suggests a morning shower but it is the sort of evidence you can never be sure about. I really doubt the perp went back to apartment to clean up. If it was very humid, does anyone have any objective evidence of how long it would take to dry?

Something I can't find and it I believe it is unknown is what items of clothing are missing? (I.e. What was she wearing when she vanished)
Her mother didn't know. Women co-workers might have been able to figure it out if anyone bothered to try. There were two outfits on her bed plus the one she wore Monday. All would go with those shoes. How many "goes with brown" outfits did she own?

If she was really in bed when someone called her or knocked on her door, there would have to be a very "tight" relationship for her to be willing to get up and leave the condo. Either some sort of "romantic partner" or a work emergency are the two that come to mind.

I am beginning to adjust my opinion of a PM abduction from " extremely unlikely" to just "unlikely"

 

[liz b.]

Liz if you are new to this, I found the Unconcluded Podcast to be a great refresher. It goes over the old evidence and some new. And gives a very comprehensive account of the events.

http://unconcluded.com/

I recall the case, but never followed it here. TY for the podcast info. Very informative. I plan on reading as much as I can. Taking notes etc...

So there were no security cameras in the parking lot of JK's condo ? I am thinking that she may have been grabbed right by her car, that was why J. and her abductor left in her car. It was the quickest, most convenient way to take her, as she was walking to her car to go to work that morning. jmo