MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 #6

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #161
this just makes me so angry. just 2 weeks ago Shaw was adamant the van was THE VAN and didn't want any tips not related to the van as it was wasting their time. All along I thought the van was only possibly connected but LE was convinced. Now they don't know? amateur hour. they wasted time and lost tips and public help by insisting the van was involved. people wouldn't be reporting anything not related to the van when it could have been relevant.
Shaw will not find JH.

Shaw was never adamant that the van was THE VAN as in knowing for sure it was involved in abducting Jessica that I'm aware of.

and didn't want any tips not related to the van as it was wasting their time
BBM... do you have a link to show this? TIA

Ima
 
  • #162
Please be careful in discussing the witnesses. They are not suspects, persons of interest and are not to be discussed as being suspicious.

We are not going to speculate whether the witness should have went to investigate something they seen or not and we are not going to discuss why or if she should have waited until the next day. Law enforcement has not said they are suspicious so we are not going to speculate on why we think they might be.

Ima
 
  • #163
Shaw was never adamant that the van was THE VAN as in knowing for sure it was involved in abducting Jessica that I'm aware of.

and didn't want any tips not related to the van as it was wasting their time
BBM... do you have a link to show this? TIA

Ima

I think this is what absentia meant, from this article from the chat live section where Dan Shaw chats with commenters in the comments section below the article.... This is what Dan Shaw wrote....

"Please remain vigilant and report any information regarding Jessica, the silver minivan, or the subject portrayed in the sketch to NSPD (231-733-2691) or Silent Observer (231-72-CRIME). At this point, anything other than that is a distraction and serves no valuable purpose."

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/police_jessica_heeringa_case_t.html
 
  • #164
It makes sense that LE would go back and start over,basically, if they have learned that the van is not involved. But it may be too late. Where on earth to start?
 
  • #165
Does anyone know how they went from 2003-2006 to 2005 minivan? What is the unique feature of the 2005 minivan? There cant be more than 200 of this year in the area.
 
  • #166
Shaw was never adamant that the van was THE VAN as in knowing for sure it was involved in abducting Jessica that I'm aware of.

and didn't want any tips not related to the van as it was wasting their time
BBM... do you have a link to show this? TIA

Ima

sorry but yes he was. on his PD page of statements to the public he made multiple statements about that. I don't have a link to this PD page, but it's in thread #5 and I'm sure someone has it/can find it.
can anyone help me find that link?
 
  • #167
I think this is what absentia meant, from this article from the chat live section where Dan Shaw chats with commenters in the comments section below the article.... This is what Dan Shaw wrote....

"Please remain vigilant and report any information regarding Jessica, the silver minivan, or the subject portrayed in the sketch to NSPD (231-733-2691) or Silent Observer (231-72-CRIME). At this point, anything other than that is a distraction and serves no valuable purpose."

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/police_jessica_heeringa_case_t.html

yes, thanks. that's it. but he has a page of statements he's made publicly online and I can't find that link.
 
  • #168
Has the driver of the dark SUV seen in front of the van come forward yet ? If not maybe there were two vehicles involved in the abduction? The SUV could have been nearby on look out and then lead the way up Grand Haven rd. If the SUV wasn't involved why wouldn't the driver come forward as well? I'm starting to think 2 vehicles involved. Maybe and exchange was made after abduction.
 
  • #169
Has the driver of the dark SUV seen in front of the van come forward yet ? If not maybe there were two vehicles involved in the abduction? The SUV could have been nearby on look out and then lead the way up Grand Haven rd. If the SUV wasn't involved why wouldn't the driver come forward as well? I'm starting to think 2 vehicles involved. Maybe and exchange was made after abduction.

The SUV driver may not even know his vehicle is on the tape. I would not know what kind of van may have been behind me at any given time. And if there are a lot of vans out there, even more SUV's, it seems.
 
  • #170
Something that keeps playing on my mind......did someone known to Jessica and the Exxon plan a robbery with a co-conspirator (like a boyfriend), knowing her routine, etc. Did they (either singly or both together) enter the Exxon, and something went wrong - Jessica was able to identify them by sight or voice, escalating it to an abduction.

I can't quite fill the gap between intended robbery to abduction - as the cash was out in full view to take. Maybe they expected more cash on hand (i.e. hoping Jessica hadn't done a cash drop in the safe as there was still at least 30 minutes left in her shift) - she was wanting to leave on time so she had started her closing routine earlier than expected. I'm guessing she wouldn't have the number for the safe so she couldn't retrieve money already put in there (not sure how the Exxon safe would work - just making some assumptions - please correct me if wrong).

As the situation escalated, Jessica was maybe knocked/punched to get her to cooperate. I'm guessing the blood may actually be from a blood nose or broken tooth - wouldn't bleed excessively but enough to leave the blood behind at the Exxon. This injury could have happened intentionally or deliberately, depending on how frantic and desperate the two abductors were as things got out of hand.

I'm also thinking this could link into the possibility that she is still alive and been held captive (or was held captive for a period of time if she is now deceased). If the intention was not to kidnap Jessica, they may have ummed and aahed about whether to drop her off somewhere and risk her talking, or dispose of her. I just hope if this is the case, they realise abduction will bring them more understaning from LE at this point than to take her life.

I'm really questioning now if the van is involved. Seems strange if not involved, the driver would have come forward to be cleared. But as others have said, maybe they aren't local and really aren't aware of the focus on the van in Jessica's case.
 
  • #171
I wonder if the van could have been there for some 'purpose' not related to Jessica... (say, a drug deal... or something of the sort...) so of course they are not going to come forward and say "oh, that was me, I was buying some pot but have nothing to do with the missing girl..." Or if the van on the video was... say... light blue, someone could say 'well that CANT be me... mine is light blue..' even tho the color would be the same on a grainy black and white video...
If the witness ( the coworker...) saw Jessica WITH someone in a silver van.. but did not see a struggle... and now the chief is saying the van may NOT be involved... is he thinking that maybe she walked out and chatted with the guy in the van, went back in side and something happened to Jessica AFTERWARDS? Could that be why the driver of the van was ok with driving past the witness ( which I still say someone who abducted someone would not risk..) and looking at them enough to generate the sketch? To me, that could explain some things I question .... ( and if that person in the van was there for nefarious purposes, they may very well NOT have come forward...)
 
  • #172
this just makes me so angry. just 2 weeks ago Shaw was adamant the van was THE VAN and didn't want any tips not related to the van as it was wasting their time. All along I thought the van was only possibly connected but LE was convinced. Now they don't know? amateur hour. they wasted time and lost tips and public help by insisting the van was involved. people wouldn't be reporting anything not related to the van when it could have been relevant.
Shaw will not find JH.

Actually I don't think he was focused on that van very long and maybe now dosent want ppl to call them every time they see a van. We know a van was there in the area but I don't think it had anything to do with what happened to her.

JMO
 
  • #173
I wonder if the van could have been there for some 'purpose' not related to Jessica... (say, a drug deal... or something of the sort...) so of course they are not going to come forward and say "oh, that was me, I was buying some pot but have nothing to do with the missing girl..." Or if the van on the video was... say... light blue, someone could say 'well that CANT be me... mine is light blue..' even tho the color would be the same on a grainy black and white video...
If the witness ( the coworker...) saw Jessica WITH someone in a silver van.. but did not see a struggle... and now the chief is saying the van may NOT be involved... is he thinking that maybe she walked out and chatted with the guy in the van, went back in side and something happened to Jessica AFTERWARDS? Could that be why the driver of the van was ok with driving past the witness ( which I still say someone who abducted someone would not risk..) and looking at them enough to generate the sketch? To me, that could explain some things I question .... ( and if that person in the van was there for nefarious purposes, they may very well NOT have come forward...)


Maybe just passing thru and that person has no idea anyone is even looking for him! Heck he could be anywhere. And innocent!

The ppl to look at if you ask me are the ppl that were there. And who was doing anything out of the norm that evening. Who wasn't where they usually are? Start there....
 
  • #174
Something that keeps playing on my mind......did someone known to Jessica and the Exxon plan a robbery with a co-conspirator (like a boyfriend), knowing her routine, etc. Did they (either singly or both together) enter the Exxon, and something went wrong - Jessica was able to identify them by sight or voice, escalating it to an abduction.

I can't quite fill the gap between intended robbery to abduction - as the cash was out in full view to take. Maybe they expected more cash on hand (i.e. hoping Jessica hadn't done a cash drop in the safe as there was still at least 30 minutes left in her shift) - she was wanting to leave on time so she had started her closing routine earlier than expected. I'm guessing she wouldn't have the number for the safe so she couldn't retrieve money already put in there (not sure how the Exxon safe would work - just making some assumptions - please correct me if wrong).

As the situation escalated, Jessica was maybe knocked/punched to get her to cooperate. I'm guessing the blood may actually be from a blood nose or broken tooth - wouldn't bleed excessively but enough to leave the blood behind at the Exxon. This injury could have happened intentionally or deliberately, depending on how frantic and desperate the two abductors were as things got out of hand.

I'm also thinking this could link into the possibility that she is still alive and been held captive (or was held captive for a period of time if she is now deceased). If the intention was not to kidnap Jessica, they may have ummed and aahed about whether to drop her off somewhere and risk her talking, or dispose of her. I just hope if this is the case, they realise abduction will bring them more understaning from LE at this point than to take her life.

I'm really questioning now if the van is involved. Seems strange if not involved, the driver would have come forward to be cleared. But as others have said, maybe they aren't local and really aren't aware of the focus on the van in Jessica's case.

This was what I had been thinking since day one. I think this was a robbery have said that over and over. They had to get to her before she put the money in that vault because she can not open it.... many times its a hole in the floor and the bills go in there. They had to get to her before she locked the doors...I think one went in the station the guy of the team <Mod Snip> jmo


<Mod Snip>
 
  • #175
sorry but yes he was. on his PD page of statements to the public he made multiple statements about that. I don't have a link to this PD page, but it's in thread #5 and I'm sure someone has it/can find it.
can anyone help me find that link?

I don't know about the police department statements but I do know that in thread #5 I posted this from Mlive when some people on Webslueths thought the van was directly related, and in that post I said that it is not in "direct quotes" like some other things Shaw has said in the article, so I wondered if it was left to the discretion of the news reporter/writer for the paper/article....
This is what was in that article online.........


" Shaw said a silver or gray minivan is definitely linked to her abduction and a man driving that van away from the gas station the night of her abduction holds the key to her current location. "

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/police_chief_jessica_heeringas_1.html

This was from May 15th.
 
  • #176
I think this is what absentia meant, from this article from the chat live section where Dan Shaw chats with commenters in the comments section below the article.... This is what Dan Shaw wrote....

"Please remain vigilant and report any information regarding Jessica, the silver minivan, or the subject portrayed in the sketch to NSPD (231-733-2691) or Silent Observer (231-72-CRIME). At this point, anything other than that is a distraction and serves no valuable purpose."

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/police_jessica_heeringa_case_t.html


Thank you Treelights,

If you read all of the comments that Dan Shaw was responding to I think puts his comment into more perspective. They were all arguing about what year the van was, and how they felt the investigation should be going. I don't get that he is saying don't call in any other information to us unless its about this van that they don't want anything else. In fact he says... 'Please remain vigilant and report any information regarding Jessica,' along with the van and sketch of the suspect. That's how I take this.

Dan Shaw

I am not going to debate law enforcement tactics or procedures in this forum. However, I will say that the Task Force consists of some of the finest investigators and law enforcement professionals I've ever had the pleasure of working with during my 28+ years in law enforcement. I don't know if any one person can truly be prepared to handle a case of this magnitude; but, with all of the years of experience assembled I don't know of many situations that this team couldn't handle.

Please remain vigilant and report any information regarding Jessica, the silver minivan, or the subject portrayed in the sketch to NSPD (231-733-2691) or Silent Observer (231-72-CRIME). At this point, anything other than that is a distraction and serves no valuable purpose.


This link shows comments made by Dan Shaw only...
http://connect.mlive.com/user/nortonshoreschief/index.html
Dan Shaw
 
  • #177
I don't know about the police department statements but I do know that in thread #5 I posted this from Mlive when some people on Webslueths thought the van was directly related, and in that post I said that it is not in "direct quotes" like some other things Shaw has said in the article, so I wondered if it was left to the discretion of the news reporter/writer for the paper/article....
This is what was in that article online.........


" Shaw said a silver or gray minivan is definitely linked to her abduction and a man driving that van away from the gas station the night of her abduction holds the key to her current location. "

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/police_chief_jessica_heeringas_1.html

This was from May 15th.

I do think Mr. Shaw feels the van is linked to Jessica's abduction, but it doesn't mean he doesn't want only tips that involve this van called in. I think they are looking at everything and want to clear this van and the man driving it if at all possible. So far that hasn't been done but until they find the van and the driver they can never say for sure they are involved 100%.

Treelights I think that's an important point you made about it not being in direct quotes.
 
  • #178
sorry but yes he was. on his PD page of statements to the public he made multiple statements about that. I don't have a link to this PD page, but it's in thread #5 and I'm sure someone has it/can find it.
can anyone help me find that link?

Thanks absentia, I'll see if I can locate the PD page you are speaking of, maybe I just take it different. I can certainly understand how it can be taken the way you are taking it as well.
 
  • #179
I do think Mr. Shaw feels the van is linked to Jessica's abduction, but it doesn't mean he doesn't want only tips that involve this van called in. I think they are looking at everything and want to clear this van and the man driving it if at all possible. So far that hasn't been done but until they find the van and the driver they can never say for sure they are involved 100%.

Treelights I think that's an important point you made about it not being in direct quotes.

Yes, they still need other tips as well but the fact that they haven't been able to clear that van or its driver yet speaks volumes to me.
 
  • #180
If the van is not directly connected with her abduction, what are we left with ?

1. A dark sedan seen in the video leaving the crime scene behind the silver mini-van.

2. The co-worker parked across the street in the strip mall parking lot near the time of the abduction. Whom by the way, did not investigate the suspicious activity she saw at the time, and didn't report what she witnessed until the next day after the story broke in public.

One of the locals clarified the location of the strip mall that is not across the street but on the same side of the street with a service drive in between. Media articles indicated that the music store was across the street from the Exxon station, but Flutterby explained the location in her post. I think that most of us thought that across the street meant looking forward from the Exxon station, but the strip mall is actually to the side of the gas station.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #5
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
3,344
Total visitors
3,483

Forum statistics

Threads
632,630
Messages
18,629,414
Members
243,228
Latest member
sandy83
Back
Top