I do not think she is going to return alive!
I think this was personal!
JMO
If Jessica owed someone money, I would think they would have taken her purse with the 400 plus dollars in it....unless she had More money in her purse that was given , for whatever reason, to the perp, before she was taken. And please don't say Occam's Razor....this is a thought, and to discount different thoughts is not thinking outside of the box, and sometimes thinking "outside of the box" can help a case. In My Opinion Only....
Coming up with different scenerios might actually help generate ideas at this point.....
If Jessica owed someone money, I would think they would have taken her purse with the 400 plus dollars in it....unless she had More money in her purse that was given , for whatever reason, to the perp, before she was taken. And please don't say Occam's Razor....this is a thought, and to discount different thoughts is not thinking outside of the box, and sometimes thinking "outside of the box" can help a case. In My Opinion Only....
Coming up with different scenerios might actually help generate ideas at this point.....
SH wasn't telling JH that she'd be there for J's child until JH returned. She told J to be there for her child. Doesn't make sense. Anyway, may just be an awkward sentence spoken in a time of duress.
Some of the points I make is because they're stuck in head and they've been pointed out in earlier cases here on WS. In previous cases, there were language and body language experts. One of the observations made was when peeps refer to a missing person in the past tense. The experts picked up on that and suggested it might mean something. I'm not making this stuff up or trying to point fingers at anybody but I notice and post it. I learned on WS that language used may be an unconscious clue or a slip up. If people are in the habit of talking that way (use tense incorrectly), it may be as simple as that and mean nothing.
I do not think she is going to return alive!
I think this was personal!
JMO
Sadly, I agree. While we don't know how much blood was found, that Jessica's blood was found at the scene of the abduction indicates that some type of struggle ensued as Jessica was being taken against her will. If she struggled then, Jessica more than likely continued her efforts to escape the perpetrator. I don't have a good feeling about this.![]()
http://fox17online.com/2013/05/17/jessica-heeringa-scam-suspect-confronted/#axzz2TfAS1BA0
"NORTON SHORES, Mich.- Two women are accused of soliciting money for Jessica Heeringas son and police say they are pocketing the money.
Roosevelt Park Police Chief David Boone says, She went from customer to customer asking for donations- several of the people did give her some money.
Neither of the women are affiliated with the Herringa Family."
Read more: http://fox17online.com/2013/05/17/jessica-heeringa-scam-suspect-confronted/#ixzz2TfB5BlHC
Another Friday night goes by with nothing... three weeks in... I fear there is so much more to this then the police even know... I think much is not what it seems... I fear for her... her poor family.... IMHO
I know exactly what Jessica's mother meant by the statement: That Jessica needs to come home so that she (Jessica) can be there for her son. Makes perfect sense to me. No confusion about it and not reading anything into it that isn't there.
If you're referring to "statement analysis" as a means of detecting deceit in things that people say, it's more a pseudo-science like handwriting analysis. Statement analysis is sometimes used as a baseline tool for determining the quality of peoples' comments, conversations, interviews, but similarly to polygraphs, the results are not admissible in court. When using statement analysis as an investigative tool, much has to be known about the individual whose language patterns are being scrutinized. Many factors must be considered: Regions where the individual has lived, level of intelligence and education, whether or not the person is bilingual, has language, learning or speech problems, etc.
If you're familiar with the JonBenet Ramsey case, several experts in linguistics dissected the lengthy ransom letter and had different interpretations about who might have written it and what the content of the letter meant. I remember reading and hearing these experts comment on the notorious ransom letter ad nauseam but no one ever determined exactly who wrote it or what it meant.
:moo:
I agree completely. there is more going on and things are not as they seem.
very Twin Peaks.
I do not understand, can you safely give me some examples of what seems "off" to you in your opinion that leads you to speculate that "things are not as they appear?
I guess I am not a very good thinker outside the box. I try to learn from all the posters here and see things from other peoples perspective.
And I am posing this to all posters. Thank you.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.