MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 #8

[jenstar]

Okay, what's NOT adding up to me.. if you followed the van for awhile, if you suspected it was someone you knew..why are you not on the first security tape. And JA put himself there at the store, at also about 10:30. which was the same time the guitar store employee saw the van double back...hmmm

 

[docwho3]

This whole abduction went entirely too smoothly to fit with this being a first time unplanned abduction. So my impression so far is that this was someone who has done other very bad things or that this was someone paid paid to deliver her to someone. The blood drops at the scene are reminiscent of the Holly Bobo case.

Now I wonder . . .if you are going to abduct someone from an area should you be doing that from a station you will be passing by every day (whether in the same vehicle or another low vehicle) or do you pick someone from an area you will not be passing through any more or at least where trips are few and far between or where you would only be driving past in a semi and thus not easily visible from lower vehicles?

According to one of the news articles I just finished reading, and watching, this person sort of cased the joint before abducting her.
I remember some person was saying that a guy was flirting with her and asking if she wasn't supposed to be out there (outside) or some such thing.
This makes me think she was targeted . . chosen for abduction. She was the right small height and light weight to be easily overpowered and might be a body stowed away and pretty and . . . . .all alone.

I have a very bad feeling about this case.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

IIRC, prior to starting her shift, Jessica had cashed her paycheck (perhaps at Meijer that's up the road a bit from the Exxon station). This was the reason that Jessica had $400+ in her purse. The stop at Meijer (or a bank) could be added to the timeline.

 

[Stinneb]

IIRC, prior to starting her shift, Jessica had cashed her paycheck (perhaps at Meijer that's up the road a bit from the Exxon station). This was the reason that Jessica had $400+ in her purse. The stop at Meijer (or a bank) could be added to the timeline.

I didn't see the phone call to Jessicas fiancé. It says here they talked at about 10-10.15
Or did I miss it on the timeline?

According to the timeline in the link she also had the last transaction at 10.55. Don't know if this is accurate and I hope I don't add more confusion.
The link:

http://www.crimelibrary.com/blog/2013/04/29/update-missing-mother-jessica-heeringa/index.html

 

[Stinneb]

If the witness saw JH at 10.15 and nothing out of the ordinary I suppose she would have ended the phone conversation with her fiancé at that point, since the witness didn't mention it. I guess we can't confirm how accurate the times given are. But I would guess the fiance would be able to see on his phone exactly when they talked (assuming it was a cell, most likely IMO)

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

I didn't see the phone call to Jessicas fiancé. It says here they talked at about 10-10.15
Or did I miss it on the timeline?

According to the timeline in the link she also had the last transaction at 10.55. Don't know if this is accurate and I hope I don't add more confusion.
The link:

http://www.crimelibrary.com/blog/2013/04/29/update-missing-mother-jessica-heeringa/index.html

Yes, phone chat with Dakotah could be added to timeline.

With regard to the check-cashing before she went to work, I think that Jessica is seen on surveillance video wherever it was that she went to cash her paycheck. At Meijer, it would be at the Customer Service desk or an onsite bank which is the case at some Meijer stores.

 

[Treelights]

Okay, what's NOT adding up to me.. if you followed the van for awhile, if you suspected it was someone you knew..why are you not on the first security tape. And JA put himself there at the store, at also about 10:30. which was the same time the guitar store employee saw the van double back...hmmm

I am not understanding the exact time that the witness followed the van. The first security tape time was 10:46pm from the Homestead Bar.
Jessica Heeringa Abduction Suspect Vehicle - YouTube

That was before Jessica was abducted, I thought.
I thought that the witness drove past the Exxon and saw the van with it's lights being turned off, so they turned around and watched this happen.
Is it known that the witness was not on the first video tape? Why would the witness follow the van if the van was on the way to Exxon, and that it hadn't gotten there yet? I don't understand why the witness would be following the van from the first video given the time. I know at one time it was said that the video time was off/wrong.
It makes more sense from the perspective of the second video tape, after Jessica was no longer at the Exxon....but it is confusing.
Also, are you saying that it is possible the reason why the witness was not on the first video tape, was because the witness could have been in a different vehicle altogether, and not on a motorcycle?
Was the witness coming from a different direction so that the witness was not on the first security video?
There is a motorcycle in the parking lot to the first video, but seeing as it is a bar, the bike could belong to any patron.
IMOO.

 

[Treelights]

How many people saw the van turn around, and saw the van in the back of the Exxon station?
The female co-worker witness and her husband said she and her husband did.
In this article a male worker said He saw a van drive suspiciously around the corner where he worked, and that was around 10:30pm.

"However we've now learned that before Jessica's disappearance, a silver van was spotted by a worker across the street. He told our investigator that around 10:30 p.m. on Friday, April 26, the night Jessica Hearing disappeared, he saw a silver van driving slowly and suspiciously around the building where he worked.

Q: So just to get it correct, the silver van circled around and went down the street and then turned around, faced the Exxon station down the street?

A: That's correct, the witness said he saw the van go down the street and face the Exxon for at least 10 or 15 minutes."
http://www.wzzm13.com/news/article/...months-private-investigator-reveals-new-clues

 

[Treelights]

If the time stamp is actually wrong on the first video and it is supposed to be 10:51pm, and the van was seen at that time on the first video, how is it possible that at 10:51pm, Jessica had her last sale at the Exxon? Would that mean that the van was on the way at that time to the Exxon station and the unidentified male worker was wrong about his time watching the van, or did that mean that the van left the Exxon at that time, and it isn't possible that Jessica had rung up her last sale on the cash register then, that maybe someone else did?
IMOO.

 

[jenstar]

IIRC, prior to starting her shift, Jessica had cashed her paycheck (perhaps at Meijer that's up the road a bit from the Exxon station). This was the reason that Jessica had $400+ in her purse. The stop at Meijer (or a bank) could be added to the timeline.

Could be, but we don't have a timestamp for that. I've researched and researched and couldn't find a time for her stopping to cash her check at Meijer. Nor can we pin-point when she left home so that we could place her there before her shift started. In case anyone can dig that up Here's the Meijer Store locator and Map showing the driving distance as well.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/119...a36c755d4145!2m2!1d-86.202018!2d43.156508!3e0
http://www.meijer.com/custserv/locate_store.cmd

 

[jenstar]

If the time stamp is actually wrong on the first video and it is supposed to be 10:51pm, and the van was seen at that time on the first video, how is it possible that at 10:51pm, Jessica had her last sale at the Exxon? Would that mean that the van was on the way at that time to the Exxon station and the unidentified male worker was wrong about his time watching the van, or did that mean that the van left the Exxon at that time, and it isn't possible that Jessica had rung up her last sale on the cash register then, that maybe someone else did?
IMOO.

You're on the right track. Here's what I dug up.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/jessica-heeringa-van-surveillance-911-call_n_3187805.html

He 911 Call at 11:15, Mind you.
He stated: "There's a car here. there's another car out back."- That makes three cars total in the parking lot. Jessica's parked in the lot, The caller's at the pump and another unknown car.

The timeframe isn't fitting because it wasn't Jessica that rung up the last transaction. (in theory)Also if you recall, the 911 caller stated that the pump wasn't working so he went inside. Whomever cashed out the last transaction, also shut off the pumps. Indicating that they KNEW HOW to use the REGISTER and the pumps.
Bingo..we have a winner.. (JMHO)

 

[jenstar]

Someone was there. There were two vehicles involved. We have a van and an unknown car in the lot. Whomever was driving the car, was probably the one who worked the register and pumps. Also was probably in the back seat with Jessica while the van drove off. They probably came up with a good explanation as to why their car was still there. (I work here so I left my car here..car problems..etc) They decided to come back to get it later after they saw that the cops were there. Most likely the next morning to avoid suspicion. Because, of course.. they want it to seem totally unrelated.

This is all my own theory of course..but I can't say I'm too far off based on the facts.

 

[jenstar]

Edited Timeline:

4:30pm-JH starts her shift, a shift she'd picked up or covered for someone else.

Nothing out of the ordinary that we know of, almost all day.

9:00pm-Witness #1 (CV)-States that Jessica was outside near a gas pump talking to a man in a grey van, but didn't get a look at his face. He has a distinct voice, and was kind flirting with Jess (by the snip of conversation he heard.)

*10:00pm-10:15pm: Jessica and DQD talked on the phone.

10:15pm-10:30pm: witness #2 (JA)-States he's a friend of JH and regular customer of the Exxon. Reported nothing out of the ordinary for that timeframe while he was there.

An unnamed witness 10:30pm-stated he saw a van go down the street and double back to park facing the Exxon station http://www.wzzm13.com/news/article/2...eals-new-clues

10:51pm-final purchase before Jess went missing. Logged on the cash register tape receipt.

approx. 11:00pm- according to the latest article "Police said the woman and her husband were riding motorcycles about 11 p.m. on April 26 — about the time Heeringa disappeared. They saw him open and shut the back hatch and take off. They say they followed him until he turned onto the main road.

11:15pm-911 call made by a regular customer who noticed something suspicious.

approximate time from 10:51-11:04-First video -very grainy captures a Grey Van on tape heading North on Grand Haven Rd. (timestamp incorrect on video)

At exactly 11:04pm- 2nd video shows same van going North on Grand Haven Rd, towards Airport Rd.
__________________

 

[giagreen]

In gas stations I worked at the employee has to push a button to okay a gas transaction. So not sure if the gas pump would have been shut off. But somebody had to of rung something up other then jessica

Sent from my Z796C using Tapatalk

 

[jenstar]

In gas stations I worked at the employee has to push a button to okay a gas transaction. So not sure if the gas pump would have been shut off. But somebody had to of rung something up other then jessica

Sent from my Z796C using Tapatalk

I wonder if it was beeping when the customer walked in?

Also, could you be able to tell by the type of pump that the Exxon has; if it's the "approve" type, or the old style that they had to shut off when not in use?
Would you look at that for me, since I've got no experience with these things?
Nevermind: I think I answered my own question: The pumps are "newer". I saw it while I was re-watching this video. http://fox17online.com/news/stories/missing-woman-jessica-heeringa/#axzz2y1ytfef9
So it would have had to have been approved.
But you're right @Gia. Still doesn't explain the transaction.

 

[jenstar]

Ok, my DH said that it depends on the "policy" if it was pre-pay system, which is widely used. If it's pre pay: The minute I pick up the gas handle, it would beep to let me authorize it. If I set the handle back into the cradle, it would stop. So it wouldn't be beeping anymore by the time I'd walk into the store. So, I guess that's irrelavent.

However, This customer picked up the handle and expected to get gas right away.

Q1: Did he attempt to pay with card and the "pump wasn't working?"

Because I was told if he paid with card it was already authorized , the register worker wouldn't have to do anything.

Which would mean that the pump was shut off, if it wouldn't work with his card, correct?

Unless, he was expecting to be "authorized". So that he could come in and pay cash. And that didn't happen...

Weird that breaking something like this down, helps with the timeline. MHO

 

[Treelights]

In this video, CH is being interviewed by a TV reporter( he is the 911 caller) and he mentions at 19 seconds in the video,
"Well, first I attempted to purchase gas with a pay inside....nothing... the clerk has to activate that, the lights were on, everything seemed normal...we went inside (snipped by me....)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBq7mKz8Duk

At 2 minutes 38 seconds in the video he mentions that he didn't notice anybody leaving as in no suspicious vehicles or anything.
He was the one that called 911 to report that there was his vehicle, jessica's vehicle and another vehicle there.
I wonder if he did then recognize that other vehicle, or if he meant he did not see any suspicious vehicles...
IMOO.

 

[jenstar]

In this video, CH is being interviewed by a TV reporter( he is the 911 caller) and he mentions at 19 seconds in the video,
"Well, first I attempted to purchase gas with a pay inside....nothing... the clerk has to activate that, the lights were on, everything seemed normal...we went inside (snipped by me....)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBq7mKz8Duk

At 2 minutes 38 seconds in the video he mentions that he didn't notice anybody leaving as in no suspicious vehicles or anything.
He was the one that called 911 to report that there was his vehicle, jessica's vehicle and another vehicle there.
I wonder if he did then recognize that other vehicle, or if he meant he did not see any suspicious vehicles...
IMOO.

Thanks for clearing that up.

That's what I was thinking too..If it belonged to an employee and if he'd seen it before it wouldn't be suspicious at all. But he named it in the 911 call. Which tells me that if he's used to seeing either car. That it was odd to see both cars. Hmm.."Jess's and ___'s cars are here, but no one's in the store." moo

 

[Treelights]

911 call from CH concerning the Exxon Station.
He mentioned there's a car parked by the building, and also a Honda SUV,
and CH is in the black jeep.

http://www.freep.com/VideoNetwork/2338539285001/911-call-in-the-Jessica-Heeringa-case

 

[jenstar]

911 call from CH concerning the Exxon Station.
He mentioned there's a car parked by the building, and also a Honda SUV,
and CH is in the black jeep.

http://www.freep.com/VideoNetwork/2338539285001/911-call-in-the-Jessica-Heeringa-case

Also in this version, it's edited to where there's no bleeping. Almost like they released just the information we "needed to know". Because.. not everyone needs to know. Seems legit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukHxPjRfgBc
However, in YOUR 911 call, I hear him start to say something right after he describes the vehicles and it's bleeped for a long period of time.
That may be where he identifies who the other car belongs to. Of course that's moo and my speculation.