FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #2

[fl_sun]

I agree but I am still thinking of someone she knew.

 

[Sundayrain]

I truly believe in this case that it was a maintenance type person who saw an opportunity,why? It just fits with a timeline and the choice where her car was discovered.I don't beleve they have to go much further than the property she lived on to get the answer.

I think you are exactly right. But, where are the witnesses? Someone heard something......or saw something. I know they stood on those corners with signs, the sight of the parents working so hard to find her was so moving.
The LE searching for Laura Mac were in California the week before a tip came in that she was in fact in Florida. Whew......big difference between where they were zeroing on, and her location. With Jennifer, it seems to have occured right there. Wonder what is the other evidence the LE has.........?

 

[fl_sun]

Maybe they are out there so Jennifer, who is unforgiving of her parent's for something they did like a betrayal, maybe she was finalizing a break up with her former boyfriend who they preferred over Rob and was being manipulated by the former boyfriend and that she could see they are now in full support of Rob who they have accepted as a part of their family. There is a huge missing component. The whole story is not known by us.

 

[Sundayrain]

Maybe they are out there so Jennifer, who is unforgiving of her parent's for something they did like a betrayal, maybe she was finalizing a break up with her former boyfriend who they preferred over Rob and was being manipulated by the former boyfriend and that she could see they are now in full support of Rob who they have accepted as a part of their family. There is a huge missing component. The whole story is not known by us.

Does anyone post here from the family? I couldn't find anything regarding that.
I only know a very distant connection that wouldn't help. One of those my friends, daughters, friends......cousin type of things.....Not nearly what you'd need for some answers. I am surprised that there isn't someone who is pushing for the family......getting the word out Nationally. So just wondering, does anyone write? I might be able to pass a distant word along that they might get some help by doing so.......Sunday

 

[fl_sun]

No, only I believe once, simply thanking us. I would like them to get on board at, at least one of these forums (or one of their own) as Ms. Jakowski is for her son. She finds a lot of support in doing so, but each parent and family is different. I don't know what I would do on a daily basis short of banging on doors (I would be banging on doors, that's where I would be, no matter if I'm in a seedy area or not). People eventually open up, I know that from personal experience. You have to ask the same question in several different ways and you will get some form of answer. I don't think standing on the corner with a sign is enough. There is a mother of a son, a grandmother, a sister, a girl/boy friend, aquaintance who if nudged personally, just a little more than a sign on the corner, that will talk about what they have been holding inside. Sometimes people don't come out with information for years (when they are away from the danger of talking).

 

[Beyond Belief]

Hi guys,

I haven't been in here for awhile, but definitely have not stopped thinking about Jenn. This case is so frustrating.
The whole situation is so strange. To be away on vacation, returned one day and have this happen. Doesn't seem like someone stalking her. I wonder if there was anyone asking questions at the complex about her where abouts or even more if there were any phone calls for her while she was gone. Surely the boys would have recalled any strange questions they received.
Orlando has so many carjackings, I just keep going back to that. I still feel the missing cell phone is a key. Has anyone ever finally told us where they "really" think she went to send off the cell phone?

 

[fl_sun]

I think she planned to send the cell phone during her lunch break at work. She said "I'll send it either on my way to work or during my lunch break".. because he was proding and pressuring her to get it to him asap. Which is weird, if I wanted a phone so badly, I would drive back and get it.

 

[fl_sun]

I just pray to God in heaven that if something awful happened to Jennifer, that God pour out his wrath against who is responsible for this. Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord.

 

[Beyond Belief]

Hopefully he's already been picked up for some other crime and is off the streets. Thats usually how this goes.

 

[docwho3]

I have not followed this case extremely closely lately. I checked in from time to time to see if anything new cropped up. But I decided to take a break from thinking of the case to clear my head and try to look at it with a fresh approach. So with that in mind let me look at things again and sort of think/post out loud. If I get some things wrong please forgive the mistakes as I am at least trying to look at things from different angles than I did before.

In some cases serial killers of the past I remember reading that the perp had access to keys of the buildings or homes of the victems. Sometimes the perp was related to the building owner or worked for the building management in some way. BTK had actually installed alarms in some homes and another killer with an alleged count of 49 victems or so had a relative who owned a building and so was able to work for him and so got keys to apartments of that building and then victemized people and I recall a recent case in which a man was discovered living in a building illegally that had duct tape, weapons,including a hand made strangulation device, and cards listing potential victems and keys to several homes in his possession.

Given that getting keys to apartments and homes seems fairly easy for some killers, I wonder if she was surprised by someone who had keys (or key cards or otherwise obtained entry codes or other means) and who just walked right in? Yet I am puzzled that early posts about the case seemed to indicate that evidence was found in the car indicating some crime had taken place there. (I remember posts to the effect that the parents didnt want the car any more because of the evidence in it of a crime having been committed in it. It is late though so I won't go look up the exact post at the moment. And I have no way of knowing if that info was even correct.)

If she was surprised in the apartment why take her down to the car to commit a crime of some sort against her? Did someone want to drive her to some outdoor remote location for more privacy than might have been afforded in the apartment building, a place where they might have more control over the crime scene? (I said "outdoor remote location" just because it seemed if she was taken to another building and a crime committed against her then why would there be evidence of some crime having taken place in the car?)

And then I never knew exactly what evidence was found in the car so I do not know if it was blood or semen or something else. If I remember right it was worded in a way to make me think it might have been a quantity of blood stains but I don't know that anyone ever said for sure.

Sooooo, was this a case of someone catching her at her car when she was getting in or out and then taking her to a remote outdoor location somewhere and committing some crime and then returning the car close to the area where she lived and more importantly close to where the perps own transportation was located? If two people were involved I would think one of them would have driven their own car and followed Jennifer's car to the location of the crime and there would have been no need to return Jennifer's car to the area it was found in.

So perhaps we are looking for a single perp who caught Jennifer getting into or out of her car and who then took Jennifer in her own car to some remote location where a crime was committed and the body could be disposed of and who then drove her car back to near where his own car was parked because he possibly had driven his own car to and from the general area of the abduction scene. To me (although it might all be old hat for others) this is a different approach to the case than my previous thoughts because it means this person might not live or work in the same buildling as Jennifer.

I am still at a loss to explain why the perp was at the scene. Why was he there where he could see and get Jennifer? Was he out hunting a victem and had he staked out the spot where he found Jennifer? Was he out looking for someone to rob only it turned into something more? Was Jennifer merely an accidental target of opportunity of an unplanned crime or had this person been actively hunting for a victem in that area and Jennifer happened along or did he stalk Jennifer and plan to get her specifically? So far I see no evidence that she was stalked so I can't make that leap. But somehow I get the impression that this person might have been actively hunting for some victem to feed on. I say that partly because of the Person Of Interest in the pic that was released. If that person was the killer (a very iffy if) and was walking instead of climbing from Jennifers car into his own then it means he had parked his car some distance away from the place where he dropped off Jennifers car and perhaps a little ways off from the area of the actual abduction and that could possibly indicate an intended purpose of keeping his personal vehicle from being connected to the case and that could indicate planning to hunt for a victem. (I stress the words "could indicate" because I can't say that it is a certainty at all.)

All of which brings me back to the possibility that if the alleged evidence of a crime in the car info was incorrect or if I misremembered it that would change things entirely. With no forensic evidence of foul play at all I would still have to consider possibility of an adult runaway situation.

 

[Sundayrain]

I have not followed this case extremely closely lately. I checked in from time to time to see if anything new cropped up. But I decided to take a break from thinking of the case to clear my head and try to look at it with a fresh approach. So with that in mind let me look at things again and sort of think/post out loud. If I get some things wrong please forgive the mistakes as I am at least trying to look at things from different angles than I did before.

In some cases serial killers of the past I remember reading that the perp had access to keys of the buildings or homes of the victems. Sometimes the perp was related to the building owner or worked for the building management in some way. BTK had actually installed alarms in some homes and another killer with an alleged count of 49 victems or so had a relative who owned a building and so was able to work for him and so got keys to apartments of that building and then victemized people and I recall a recent case in which a man was discovered living in a building illegally that had duct tape, weapons,including a hand made strangulation device, and cards listing potential victems and keys to several homes in his possession.

Given that getting keys to apartments and homes seems fairly easy for some killers, I wonder if she was surprised by someone who had keys (or key cards or otherwise obtained entry codes or other means) and who just walked right in? Yet I am puzzled that early posts about the case seemed to indicate that evidence was found in the car indicating some crime had taken place there. (I remember posts to the effect that the parents didnt want the car any more because of the evidence in it of a crime having been committed in it. It is late though so I won't go look up the exact post at the moment. And I have no way of knowing if that info was even correct.)

If she was surprised in the apartment why take her down to the car to commit a crime of some sort against her? Did someone want to drive her to some outdoor remote location for more privacy than might have been afforded in the apartment building, a place where they might have more control over the crime scene? (I said "outdoor remote location" just because it seemed if she was taken to another building and a crime committed against her then why would there be evidence of some crime having taken place in the car?)

And then I never knew exactly what evidence was found in the car so I do not know if it was blood or semen or something else. If I remember right it was worded in a way to make me think it might have been a quantity of blood stains but I don't know that anyone ever said for sure.

Sooooo, was this a case of someone catching her at her car when she was getting in or out and then taking her to a remote outdoor location somewhere and committing some crime and then returning the car close to the area where she lived and more importantly close to where the perps own transportation was located? If two people were involved I would think one of them would have driven their own car and followed Jennifer's car to the location of the crime and there would have been no need to return Jennifer's car to the area it was found in.

So perhaps we are looking for a single perp who caught Jennifer getting into or out of her car and who then took Jennifer in her own car to some remote location where a crime was committed and the body could be disposed of and who then drove her car back to near where his own car was parked because he possibly had driven his own car to and from the general area of the abduction scene. To me (although it might all be old hat for others) this is a different approach to the case than my previous thoughts because it means this person might not live or work in the same buildling as Jennifer.

I am still at a loss to explain why the perp was at the scene. Why was he there where he could see and get Jennifer? Was he out hunting a victem and had he staked out the spot where he found Jennifer? Was he out looking for someone to rob only it turned into something more? Was Jennifer merely an accidental target of opportunity of an unplanned crime or had this person been actively hunting for a victem in that area and Jennifer happened along or did he stalk Jennifer and plan to get her specifically? So far I see no evidence that she was stalked so I can't make that leap. But somehow I get the impression that this person might have been actively hunting for some victem to feed on. I say that partly because of the Person Of Interest in the pic that was released. If that person was the killer (a very iffy if) and was walking instead of climbing from Jennifers car into his own then it means he had parked his car some distance away from the place where he dropped off Jennifers car and perhaps a little ways off from the area of the actual abduction and that could possibly indicate an intended purpose of keeping his personal vehicle from being connected to the case and that could indicate planning to hunt for a victem. (I stress the words "could indicate" because I can't say that it is a certainty at all.)

All of which brings me back to the possibility that if the alleged evidence of a crime in the car info was incorrect or if I misremembered it that would change things entirely. With no forensic evidence of foul play at all I would still have to consider possibility of an adult runaway situation.

I find all your theories quite interesting. I'd really like to get a bit of information from someone who could post us from family. I know that certain facts have to be withheld. But, facts that might be known, that are available to the general public would help.
Did she have any reason to run anywhere? Seems things were going well for her.
Did the police go door to door? Did they talk with all the construction workers within that area? Anyone can so easily get a key to a condo......no one is safe unless they have their extra "bolts" on the door.
Thanks for bringing us more up to date with the story. I'd like to try to bring someone over from her side to inform us better. Its worth a good try.
No one should go missing in America......
There has to be an answer out there somewhere......
We need answers for Jennifer.

 

[docwho3]

http://www.wftv.com/news/6431531/detail.html

I always figured the POI pic was important because it placed someone nearby at the time her car was parked but I did not realize how close by.
I finally can possibly see why the POI pic was so important to L.E.
Look at the fence shown in the pic of her car and where her car was found and notice the fence it is parked next to.
It is the same fence and with the same hedge growing next to it as in the POI pic. Coincidence?
http://www.wftv.com/2006/0126/6462388_400X300.jpg

POI pic
http://images.ibsys.com/2006/0206/6780578_480X360.jpg

******************
More about the car and unnamed "evidence" of a crime found in it.

". . .Channel 9 has new information about the person of interest wanted for questioning in the case of a missing woman. Jennifer Kesse was reported missing four weeks ago. Also, a major clue in the case, Jennifer’s car, may now be a crime scene. . . "
". . . Investigators are calling on the public to think back whether they saw someone other than Jennifer driving the car during that time frame. The car is being called a crime scene. . ."
". . . and we believe she was in or near that vehicle during the time of her abduction," said Sgt. Rich Ring, Orlando Police Department. . ."

http://www.wftv.com/news/7293494/detail.html?rss=orlc&psp=news

. . .DREW KESSE: Personally, I believe so. I mean, the car has evidence. We know the car has evidence.
GRACE: Why do you say that?
DREW KESSE: We`ve been told that there`s additional evidence out of the car. It takes time, and there`s different tests that take anywhere from two weeks to two months.
GRACE: To process?
DREW KESSE: For results to come back. . .

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0602/22/ng.01.html

 

[LaMer]

just wanted to let you all know that drew and joyce kesse are on the monsters of the morning radio show right now. i didnt know they would be on but i listen to this show every morning and they usually don't focus on this type of subject so it was a good surprise. i think you can listen on www.monsters.fm streaming!

they havent mentioned anything new yet just going over all the facts. they did say it is a fact that she was taken...and did not go on her own will. pretty much because her car is a crime scene...but they also said they keep hope alive because there is NOT one shred of evidence that she was harmed. her mom just said there is NO way jenn would go to deliver a package at night once she was already home.

if anything else comes up ill post it.

melanie

In reading the latest posts here, and talk of the Jenn's car being a 'crime scene', brought me back to your post, Melanie.

Since Mrs. Kesse stated there is not one shred of evidence that she was harmed, means to me, no blood was found, nor sperm etc was found in the her car. Yet the car is being called a 'crime scene'.

A question for you super sleuths OK? If the OLE believe Jenn was taken from her car, although not harmed, would this be reason to call her car a 'crime scene'? I'm thinking it must. But other than that, I doubt they found any other clues of evidence, especially since the Kesses turned the car in to the leasing company.

I agree with another poster, who mentioned a maintenance worker or someone connected to the immediate area could be the perp.

Also, it seems logiacal to me, the area in and around HOTG and the woods nearby should be searched again and again.

Sometimes it is what is very simple and logical. I think, the fact Jenn's car was found in the parking lot of HOTG, is a big clue. I wish this area would be searched again.

Think about Chandra Levy. LE/Searchers didn't do enough in the area where it was thought she had visited.

Think about Elizabeth Smart. What the heck was going on there with the dogs? She was taken right up into the hills behind her house, and she wasn't detected by the dogs.

2 very good reasons to research the area where Jenn's car was found. In addition the area in the woods between her condo and HOTG.

It is very frustrating!

 

[LaMer]

DocWho3, some very good posts. I have to reread when I am fresh, LOL in the morning. Great thoughts and thanks for taking the time. That's what we need here, some fresh insights.

SundayRain, I doubt from the history of this case on the internet, we would ever get anyone close to the case to ever come forward. The Kesse appear to be very very private people. It's a shame, but I doubt we would ever get any help there. You know, and actually, I think there is very little known. Maybe that is because this case went in the wrong direction from the very beginning. Could be!

(an aside: I had my high school reunion this weekend, an old friend was there who now lives in Orlando, well about 18 miles out of Orlando, and she mentioned there were posters of Jennifer Kesse everywhere!

 

[Sundayrain]

DocWho3, some very good posts. I have to reread when I am fresh, LOL in the morning. Great thoughts and thanks for taking the time. That's what we need here, some fresh insights.

SundayRain, I doubt from the history of this case on the internet, we would ever get anyone close to the case to ever come forward. The Kesse appear to be very very private people. It's a shame, but I doubt we would ever get any help there. You know, and actually, I think there is very little known. Maybe that is because this case went in the wrong direction from the very beginning. Could be!

(an aside: I had my high school reunion this weekend, an old friend was there who now lives in Orlando, well about 18 miles out of Orlando, and she mentioned there were posters of Jennifer Kesse everywhere!

LaMer, Thanks for the information. Families should know it takes a "village"....
Anymeans, anyway, to get the word to the one person who will finally speak.
Sometimes its the LE or lawyer who stops them from saying much. In our family everyone is private too.......I asked permission first.......then I went against the mold, even before the answer came. The search has to be so big and out there. Well, in our case anyhow.
I think the Keese's are doing good with the local publicity. But, they need a push for tips ......the one tip that would recharge the case.

 

[docwho3]

. . .Since Mrs. Kesse stated there is not one shred of evidence that she was harmed, means to me, no blood was found, nor sperm etc was found in the her car. Yet the car is being called a 'crime scene'. . .

Perhaps that is what the family has interpreted the evidence to mean but their statement may not be an accurate reflection of the situation, especially if they want very badly to believe that she is still alive out there somewhere. We have news reports cited in previous post that state ". . . there`s additional evidence out of the car.. . ." so it would seem there was some evidence found in the car that caused L.E. at the time to call the car a crime scene.

How to reconcile the latest assertions by family of no evidence with the earlier reports of L.E. calling the car a crime scene?

One possibility that comes to mind is the same thing that apparently happened in the N.H. case in Aruba where they thought they had a reaction that indicated blood stains but it later turned out that so much cleaning fluid had been used that no blood DNA was later able to be retrieved in the lab. Since cleaning fluids can give off a reaction similar to blood when luminol is used (so I heard in news reports about that incident in aruba) you might think at first that you have evidence of a car being a crime scene and then when the tests come back you find that no blood or DNA was able to be recovered or not in sufficient quantities to use in the lab.

In my mind a large amount of cleaning fluid used on one seat would indicate that a large stain was cleaned up and that might make me think the car a crime scene even if the tests for blood came back inconclusive or neg. due to the cleaning fluids presence. Yet a family wanting to believe the missing person to be alive might read that stain as only someone cleaned up a spill in the seat and not be willing to think of it as evidence of foul play that was covered up by the cleaning fluids. The problem is that we do not know exactly what was or was not found in the car and until we do we won't know for sure how to take the situation and reconcile the family remarks with L.E. calling the car a crime scene. And that brings up another question: Does L.E. still consider the car to be a crime scene? I think you have to have more evidence than mere intuition that a crime occurred in a car to declare it a crime scene as far as forensics go but I have no training in that area so maybe someone with more knowledge can speak to that issue.

Evidence of a struggle in the car, ripped or torn places or scratch marks in carpet or upholstry, I supose, could be another sort of evidence that without blood evidence could be taken by family to mean no actual harm had befallen her but without knowing what evidence the news reports refer to its all just speculation.

I care about the family but I give more weight to what L.E. thinks about the case in such situations. Does L.E. still think this is a case of foul play and if so why? Or does L.E. now feel that this may be a case of an adult runaway?

 

[Sundayrain]

Perhaps that is what the family has interpreted the evidence to mean but their statement may not be an accurate reflection of the situation, especially if they want very badly to believe that she is still alive out there somewhere. We have news reports cited in previous post that state ". . . there`s additional evidence out of the car.. . ." so it would seem there was some evidence found in the car that caused L.E. at the time to call the car a crime scene.

How to reconcile the latest assertions by family of no evidence with the earlier reports of L.E. calling the car a crime scene?

One possibility that comes to mind is the same thing that apparently happened in the N.H. case in Aruba where they thought they had a reaction that indicated blood stains but it later turned out that so much cleaning fluid had been used that no blood DNA was later able to be retrieved in the lab. Since cleaning fluids can give off a reaction similar to blood when luminol is used (so I heard in news reports about that incident in aruba) you might think at first that you have evidence of a car being a crime scene and then when the tests come back you find that no blood or DNA was able to be recovered or not in sufficient quantities to use in the lab.

In my mind a large amount of cleaning fluid used on one seat would indicate that a large stain was cleaned up and that might make me think the car a crime scene even if the tests for blood came back inconclusive or neg. due to the cleaning fluids presence. Yet a family wanting to believe the missing person to be alive might read that stain as only someone cleaned up a spill in the seat and not be willing to think of it as evidence of foul play that was covered up by the cleaning fluids. The problem is that we do not know exactly what was or was not found in the car and until we do we won't know for sure how to take the situation and reconcile the family remarks with L.E. calling the car a crime scene. And that brings up another question: Does L.E. still consider the car to be a crime scene? I think you have to have more evidence than mere intuition that a crime occurred in a car to declare it a crime scene as far as forensics go but I have no training in that area so maybe someone with more knowledge can speak to that issue.

Evidence of a struggle in the car, ripped or torn places or scratch marks in carpet or upholstry, I supose, could be another sort of evidence that without blood evidence could be taken by family to mean no actual harm had befallen her but without knowing what evidence the news reports refer to its all just speculation.

I care about the family but I give more weight to what L.E. thinks about the case in such situations. Does L.E. still think this is a case of foul play and if so why? Or does L.E. now feel that this may be a case of an adult runaway?

LaMer, I answered you on Lauras page......Long one...LOL
Doc.......Our LE went to California for a week....the week before the tip came in that Laura was in Florida. They were on the wrong coast.
Did they have a PI?( for Jennifer)..... I wonder what he came up with. That we'll never hear for sure.

 

[docwho3]

LaMer, I answered you on Lauras page......Long one...LOL
Doc.......Our LE went to California for a week....the week before the tip came in that Laura was in Florida. They were on the wrong coast.

Not sure what you are saying. What I meant is that while I realize L.E. might look in the wrong place as they run down leads, they often have info unavailable to family and especially unavailable to us on these forums and they have experience to look at these cases and that info and then determine if they think they are looking for a runaway or are investigating a case of foul play.

If I remember right I read a news quote early on in Laura's case that she had left and didn't seem to want others to know where she went and that turned out to be correct even if they did look on the wrong coast as you mentioned.

Sooo what I want to know is what does L.E. think now after so much time has gone by in this Jennifer Kesse case? Are they still looking at it as a crime or are they looking at it as a runaway or what?

 

[Sundayrain]

Not sure what you are saying. What I meant is that while I realize L.E. might look in the wrong place as they run down leads, they often have info unavailable to family and especially unavailable to us on these forums and they have experience to look at these cases and that info and then determine if they think they are looking for a runaway or are investigating a case of foul play.

If I remember right I read a news quote early on in Laura's case that she had left and didn't seem to want others to know where she went and that turned out to be correct even if they did look on the wrong coast as you mentioned.

Sooo what I want to know is what does L.E. think now after so much time has gone by in this Jennifer Kesse case? Are they still looking at it as a crime or are they looking at it as a runaway or what?

Sorry Doc, my error in not completely reading your information. Also, for me giving an incomplete posting.
I guess we never know what facts the LE have, except for tidbits.
We were about to get a PI. To get facts that we could be privy to, and to do that under the rock kind of search. Sometimes a person will talk to a PI but not the police. Just easier I suppose, less intimidating......
Yes, origionally the LE thought of her as a runaway. But, because of getting no solid tips, no information on the car, their words started to change. On one news show the LE said "they were starting to get worried".
I guess my point is to not place all your hopes in the LE. How they feel, or where they think she might have gone. Putting every hope and trust in one basket. The LE for Laura came up with California......a week of searching in LA area. Totally off the mark. The Monday after they came back, the Florida call came in. I hope the Keese family might be hiring a PI. Her story never sounded like a runaway to me. To you? What about that toll collector, have you heard on that? Did they take a list of all the workers in the area? Check them out? I hate to see someone go missing over six months, all the leads get cold. I also hate to see the case go quiet.....because they need a valuable tipster right now. I hope I was a bit more clear......
Jennifer needs to be found. Sunday

 

[LaMer]

Perhaps that is what the family has interpreted the evidence to mean but their statement may not be an accurate reflection of the situation, especially if they want very badly to believe that she is still alive out there somewhere. We have news reports cited in previous post that state ". . . there`s additional evidence out of the car.. . ." so it would seem there was some evidence found in the car that caused L.E. at the time to call the car a crime scene.

How to reconcile the latest assertions by family of no evidence with the earlier reports of L.E. calling the car a crime scene?

One possibility that comes to mind is the same thing that apparently happened in the N.H. case in Aruba where they thought they had a reaction that indicated blood stains but it later turned out that so much cleaning fluid had been used that no blood DNA was later able to be retrieved in the lab. Since cleaning fluids can give off a reaction similar to blood when luminol is used (so I heard in news reports about that incident in aruba) you might think at first that you have evidence of a car being a crime scene and then when the tests come back you find that no blood or DNA was able to be recovered or not in sufficient quantities to use in the lab.

In my mind a large amount of cleaning fluid used on one seat would indicate that a large stain was cleaned up and that might make me think the car a crime scene even if the tests for blood came back inconclusive or neg. due to the cleaning fluids presence. Yet a family wanting to believe the missing person to be alive might read that stain as only someone cleaned up a spill in the seat and not be willing to think of it as evidence of foul play that was covered up by the cleaning fluids. The problem is that we do not know exactly what was or was not found in the car and until we do we won't know for sure how to take the situation and reconcile the family remarks with L.E. calling the car a crime scene. And that brings up another question: Does L.E. still consider the car to be a crime scene? I think you have to have more evidence than mere intuition that a crime occurred in a car to declare it a crime scene as far as forensics go but I have no training in that area so maybe someone with more knowledge can speak to that issue.

Evidence of a struggle in the car, ripped or torn places or scratch marks in carpet or upholstry, I supose, could be another sort of evidence that without blood evidence could be taken by family to mean no actual harm had befallen her but without knowing what evidence the news reports refer to its all just speculation.

I care about the family but I give more weight to what L.E. thinks about the case in such situations. Does L.E. still think this is a case of foul play and if so why? Or does L.E. now feel that this may be a case of an adult runaway?

Thank docwho3 for your input

As I recall, the FL State Lab and the FBI were conducting various tests, unfortuately nothing was ever released to which I was aware. I realize LE keeps info close to the chest and often we, the public, never know what was found, if anything.

What bothers me the most and makes me think this was a rather clean abduction without any evidence or leads, was when the OLE removed the two main investigators from the case, as they were needed on other matters. I know a lot of us were very upset when hearing this news. If substantial clues had been found (something to follow up on) or tips coming in, I doubt this would have happened.

About Jenn's car: I have read where possibly the front seat was in a different position, other than where Jenn had kept it. I'm not sure this was substantiated or was out there as speculation from posters at the various crime forums.

Another thing bothering me: LE didn't pursue their efforts of keeping the picture of the poi in the public's view very long. I think the poi was a long shot! Juror 13, keeps us very well informed of the local TV news about the case, and there has been nothing, nothing at all about the POI for ages and ages.

I have little confidence in the OPD, cripe, they couldn't even find Jenn's car and it was a mile or so up the road!

I don't mean to be so negative, I know that is how I coming across, but I feel so frustrated.

Why didn't someone see something? Something unusual?