MN - Jacob Wetterling, 11, St. Joseph, 22 Oct 1989 - #13

[ThePhantom]

Dave, no one ever checked into the alibis of the monks' with histories of sexual abuse of young men. Probably wouldn't have crossed their minds to do that "back then," I suppose.

Other thoughts this afternoon ...

Either the perpetrator planned this abduction to the "t" in advance of the crime, or he is the luckiest man ever. Realizing it was a dark and lonely road, there were still two other kids there observing him. Pretty gutsy. Even gutsier though is to be able to abduct a boy in front of two other people and leave no trace -- no scent, no clues -- did this man have experience doing this and if so how many times did he disguise himself and snatch a little boy? So was the perp experienced, or was this a one time "event" that was meticulously planned and eagerly anticipated? Did he drag Jacob or carry him? If he carried him he must have been in good shape to carry a 90 lb (just guessing) child. Would be interested in seeing the lowest level of DR's place and do some ground penetrating radar. Did the authorities take something from his house -- (i.e. something written -- or magazines -- or ??) that triggered them to name DR a POI? Did someone call in a tip and they aren't releasing that information? Or did DR just happen to be home alone right at the time the abduction went down and then went to bed and called it a night (w e i r d) --- I know folks in that neck of the woods may prefer to keep to themselves but I refuse to believe that if a child was abducted they wouldn't offer help (i.e. get out there and start searching like you or I would). Did LE ever look into who DR may have associated with at St. John's? We may never know. Somehow there has always and continues to be this invisible shield of denial and deceit that surrounds and protects that twisted place. Just my thoughts on a dreary afternoon.

 

[Dave K]

Dave, no one ever checked into the alibis of the monks' with histories of sexual abuse of young men. Probably wouldn't have crossed their minds to do that "back then," I suppose.

Other thoughts this afternoon ...

Either the perpetrator planned this abduction to the "t" in advance of the crime, or he is the luckiest man ever. Realizing it was a dark and lonely road, there were still two other kids there observing him. Pretty gutsy. Even gutsier though is to be able to abduct a boy in front of two other people and leave no trace -- no scent, no clues -- did this man have experience doing this and if so how many times did he disguise himself and snatch a little boy? So was the perp experienced, or was this a one time "event" that was meticulously planned and eagerly anticipated? Did he drag Jacob or carry him? If he carried him he must have been in good shape to carry a 90 lb (just guessing) child. Would be interested in seeing the lowest level of DR's place and do some ground penetrating radar. Did the authorities take something from his house -- (i.e. something written -- or magazines -- or ??) that triggered them to name DR a POI? Did someone call in a tip and they aren't releasing that information? Or did DR just happen to be home alone right at the time the abduction went down and then went to bed and called it a night (w e i r d) --- I know folks in that neck of the woods may prefer to keep to themselves but I refuse to believe that if a child was abducted they wouldn't offer help (i.e. get out there and start searching like you or I would). Did LE ever look into who DR may have associated with at St. John's? We may never know. Somehow there has always and continues to be this invisible shield of denial and deceit that surrounds and protects that twisted place. Just my thoughts on a dreary afternoon.

Dave, no one ever checked into the alibis of the monks' with histories of sexual abuse of young men. Probably wouldn't have crossed their minds to do that "back then," I suppose.

Unfortunately, that doesn't surprise me, too much!!! Aggravating!

Other thoughts this afternoon ...

FWIW, I made an earlier post on what I considered as the 'really weird' demeanor of DR concerning his finding out about an abduction on his property that night, his reaction, etc... Thread #12, post #397, pg 16.

As to the rest; yeah, there's a lot to be considered, and we have really limited information to go on; it's really aggravating. I also wonder about the 'well planned abduction' vs the 'really lucky offender' it's so hard to say; you could almost rule out the 'well planned' by the fact that no one knew that the three would be making the trip to TT's, and that the Wetterling parents would be out. I mention about the parents being out, because, someone could have possibly considered taking their chances of finding Jacob outside in his yard or something; but, I wouldn't expect anyone to try something if his parents were home. It's hard to say for a number of reasons; and again, because, we have so little to go by. I personally discount that the perp physically carried Jacob after the footprint found on DR's driveway, for a couple of reasons, I don't think the dogs would've lost Jacob's scent if that were the case; I think they would have found the perp's prints if that were the case; I think at some point, if Jacob was being carried, he would have found a way to fight and hopefully scramble; I feel like at that point, if he knew the guy was on foot, and alone, he would have taken his chances. But, it's speculation. If in fact the perp was on foot, I don't think that they would've tried an abduction of Jacob from his yard or even the near by neighborhood; if he were on foot, then the actual abduction spot would have been the only likely chance; so, that goes into the 'well planned abduction' thinking... He would have had to have a way of knowing that he'd be able to find Jacob at/around that spot, and no one could have.

One more thing; I know that at least for some time, certain scanners could pick up some cell phone traffic; as I remember, it was outlawed a few years ago. 1989 was before cell phones, but, there had been some wondering about what type of phone system would have been in the area, and whether there would have been any way, anyone could have listened in on other's calls. That would be one possibility of someone else finding out that night, that the Wetterling's were away, and the kids were going up to TT's.

 

[MotherOcean]

The rural community where my grandparents lived still had "party lines" in the mid 1980's. Not sure if they still had them in 1989, but my guess is no. I think if this were the case with the Wetterlings that it would have been mentioned by MSM sometime since the abduction.

 

[Trino]

Dave, no one ever checked into the alibis of the monks' with histories of sexual abuse of young men. Probably wouldn't have crossed their minds to do that "back then," I suppose.

Other thoughts this afternoon ...

Either the perpetrator planned this abduction to the "t" in advance of the crime, or he is the luckiest man ever. Realizing it was a dark and lonely road, there were still two other kids there observing him. Pretty gutsy. Even gutsier though is to be able to abduct a boy in front of two other people and leave no trace -- no scent, no clues -- did this man have experience doing this and if so how many times did he disguise himself and snatch a little boy? So was the perp experienced, or was this a one time "event" that was meticulously planned and eagerly anticipated? Did he drag Jacob or carry him? If he carried him he must have been in good shape to carry a 90 lb (just guessing) child. Would be interested in seeing the lowest level of DR's place and do some ground penetrating radar. Did the authorities take something from his house -- (i.e. something written -- or magazines -- or ??) that triggered them to name DR a POI? Did someone call in a tip and they aren't releasing that information? Or did DR just happen to be home alone right at the time the abduction went down and then went to bed and called it a night (w e i r d) --- I know folks in that neck of the woods may prefer to keep to themselves but I refuse to believe that if a child was abducted they wouldn't offer help (i.e. get out there and start searching like you or I would). Did LE ever look into who DR may have associated with at St. John's? We may never know. Somehow there has always and continues to be this invisible shield of denial and deceit that surrounds and protects that twisted place. Just my thoughts on a dreary afternoon.

I've posted this before but will do so again. One does not go outside looking for a person with a gun while the police are also seeking this person, especially if it is dark. In fact, in such a case (experienced with one) LE will tell people to stay inside.

 

[shergal]

I've posted this before but will do so again. One does not go outside looking for a person with a gun while the police are also seeking this person, especially if it is dark. In fact, in such a case (experienced with one) LE will tell people to stay inside.

And yet, DR says he went outside and searched through all their outbuildings.

 

[Dave K]

And yet, DR says he went outside and searched through all their outbuildings.

Right, it's another aspect of his 'weird demeanor/response' first he seems so uninterested, but, after he's been woken up and decides to go out and speak with the police, then, he says that he went and searched the outbuildings. For a man with a gun, who had just kidnapped a kid.

On the other side of that; I agree that the police should have told him to stay inside, and frankly, shouldn't have left searching outbuildings up to a civilian, if, in fact, they knew that he planned to do so.

But, I also think that LE should have searched DR's house that night, or, secured it and searched it the next day.

 

[MotherOcean]

And yet, DR says he went outside and searched through all their outbuildings.

Alone. He says he searched alone. I think of everything I have read and heard about this entire case that the fact that he claims to have searched his outbuildings alone, in the dark, with a masked gunman (presumably a madman or a psychopath or a creeper, whatever you want to call a monster) on his remote farm, where he would later retire in a home that normally had other people sleeping in it also, is the most incredulous thing of all. He must be very, very brave. Very.

 

[ThePhantom]

Hmmm, point taken about searching when a gunman is on the loose. Still, I have driven in search of missing young people with the intention of not confronting an abductor but perhaps locating the child. I could not turn in for the night. Bet none of you would either.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Hmmm, point taken about searching when a gunman is on the loose. Still, I have driven in search of missing young people with the intention of not confronting an abductor but perhaps locating the child. I could not turn in for the night. Bet none of you would either.

I would go to bed eventually, but only after Deputy Bechtold knows about the cars that turned around in my building site inbetween 9 and 10 pm.

 

[MotherOcean]

I wouldn't want to be left alone in an empty house, at night, with an armed kidnapper anywhere near! I would beg the police to stay all night! The next morning I may wonder why I had been so paranoid, but I would not want to be alone overnight. And I definitely would not be searching any outbuildings alone. But, I'm not very brave. Because I know that armed kidnappers are scary.

 

[Trackergd]

Right, it's another aspect of his 'weird demeanor/response' first he seems so uninterested, but, after he's been woken up and decides to go out and speak with the police, then, he says that he went and searched the outbuildings. For a man with a gun, who had just kidnapped a kid.

On the other side of that; I agree that the police should have told him to stay inside, and frankly, shouldn't have left searching outbuildings up to a civilian, if, in fact, they knew that he planned to do so.

But, I also think that LE should have searched DR's house that night, or, secured it and searched it the next day.

Without any prejudice against DR, LE should have secured DR's consent to search all the out buildings and then secured them. They should have requested consent to search his house. If he had refused, they should have secured it and gotten a warrant. The refusal would have been on record.

Of course this is Monday Morning Quarterbacking.... Frankly, they may have not realized the scope of this and DR's family was in good standing in the community and DR is a teacher. It may not have occurred to them to look closer with all the other potential scenario's playing in their heads. Rural St. John in 1989 was not exactly on the cutting edge of forensics technology.

 

[Trackergd]

Hmmm, point taken about searching when a gunman is on the loose. Still, I have driven in search of missing young people with the intention of not confronting an abductor but perhaps locating the child. I could not turn in for the night. Bet none of you would either.

I would have been out searching. Have been doing so since I was 10...guess it's in my blood. Now that I am older and wiser, I have a military ballistic vest for such situations.

 

[human]

Yes, for a guy who didn't know much about the kidnapping per some interview on here, it is strange that he says he searched. So which is it?

He called the police about flashlights at his woodpile, but for an armed kidnapper gunman, no problem!

 

[Sasquatch321]

Yes, for a guy who didn't know much about the kidnapping per some interview on here, it is strange that he says he searched. So which is it?

He called the police about flashlights at his woodpile, but for an armed kidnapper gunman, no problem!

So he calls about several high powered flashlights then arms himself with one to confront an armed kidnapper in his hayloft. Yeah whitey.

 

[chaplain1]

Smokey was fearsome

 

[cGorg]

So he calls about several high powered flashlights then arms himself with one to confront an armed kidnapper in his hayloft. Yeah whitey.

sorry...I'm a naïve country bumpkin....what does 'Yeah whitey' mean?

 

[Sasquatch321]

sorry...I'm a naïve country bumpkin....what does 'Yeah whitey' mean?

It means he is suddenly braver then your average person would be. Which seems odd when he was just calling 911 and sounding way too nervous about several people with flashlights. Now he is aware of a kidnapper and a kid taken and is going to confront them in the barn? This is unreal behavior, just like everything else we know now.

 

[cGorg]

It means he is suddenly braver then your average person would be. Which seems odd when he was just calling 911 and sounding way too nervous about several people with flashlights. Now he is aware of a kidnapper and a kid taken and is going to confront them in the barn? This is unreal behavior, just like everything else we know now.

Thanks Sasquatch....I appreciate your response. Sorry for my naivete. Your response makes sense.

 

[cGorg]

"Suddenly braver" means he has nothing to fear.

 

[Trino]

It means he is suddenly braver then your average person would be. Which seems odd when he was just calling 911 and sounding way too nervous about several people with flashlights. Now he is aware of a kidnapper and a kid taken and is going to confront them in the barn? This is unreal behavior, just like everything else we know now.

Where did you get this definition. I don't think it is correct.