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

[kemo]

In fact he is still talking to people... maybe he is really dumb or super arrogant. If he's the one he should have kept his mouth zipped.

Guilty or innocent, the criminally sophisticated lawyer up and say nothing while the unsophisticated think they can talk there way out of the situation (guilty or innocent). It is an indication that they are confident that LE has nothing on them.

LE officers usually know what they are doing and they know how manipulate people into confessing or making incriminating statements. Plenty of guilty people breakdown during heavy questioning but innocents get manipulated as well. It isn't just false confessions, there are many ways things you have said can be used against you.

DR has subjected himself to pretty heavy interrogation and has stood up well. I'm not saying that is proof of innocence or anything but if he turns out to be guilty, you have to give him credit for having some cajones.

 

[MotherOcean]

I agree that the tracks and footprints in the driveway are compelling evidence. That always brings me back to 2 things:

1- One, law enforcement stated that there was 1 unknown set of tire tracks in the DR driveway until Kevin came forward. Then all other tire tracks were accounted for.

2- Dan made a couple of statements with regards to those tire tracks in his driveway. He stated that a goldish sedan came tearing up the driveway during that very afternoon and if we find that car, we will have our abductor. He also stated that around the time of abduction there was a small blue car with close together headlights and a small child or woman covering their eyes in the passenger seat that drove up and around his driveway. Along with Kevin's tire tracks that would have been 3 sets of unknown tire tracks in the DR driveway. Law enforcement was able to identify all tracks but Kevin's until he came forward.

You are spot on in that these tire tracks and footprints are extremely important in solving this case. The fact that DR made a statement regarding 2 other cars that he saw that very same day and yet cops did not say there were other unidentified tire tracks is one reason I keep going back to DR as the perp.

:goodpost:

And that is why I can not fully settle on ruling DR out.

 

[shergal]

Here are a couple links, one in which the sheriff said it doesn't completely rule out a car being used, and one (by the St. Autumn blog) which states "In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward" - so I think that may be the source of our conflicting information. I'm not sure who runs (or ran) the St. Autumn blog, although I've always thought (so, JMO) it was an early blog of Joy's since both blogs share identical photos, and Joy has a copyright notice to prevent anyone else using her photos - excepting the photos she took from the St. Cloud Times, of course. If anyone knows it is someone else's blog, please feel free to correct that.

Here is the link to the sheriff's comment:
"This does not completely eliminate the possibility that a vehicle was used, although in light of the new information that possibility has diminished,'' the Sheriff's Office said." (Photo of full article at link)
http://s100.photobucket.com/user/shergal1/media/Screenshot2015-01-09at93150PM.png.html?sort=4&o=42
- Mpls. Star Tribune, Feb. 27, 2004
From newsmax.com archives: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives/


Here is the link to the St. Autumn comments:
"In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward to tell the police he had left the tire tracks in the driveway after hearing about the abduction on a police scanner and rushed to the scene in his car leaving the tire tracks behind. The driver told authorities that in 1989 he had given his name and explanation for being there to an officer at the abduction scene. No record of the conversation exists though. Also, the boys did not see or hear a vehicle that night of the abduction, so the police believe that the abductor got away with Jacob on foot, which would make the abductor someone local."
(This quote is directly under the photos of what Jacob was wearing when taken.)
http://saintautumn.wordpress.com/

This comment appears near the bottom of that same link.
"October 2003: The driver of a long-sought vehicle comes forward. Authorities rule him out as a suspect in the abduction. The theory of the case changes, leading investigators to focus on local suspects who could’ve been on foot when snatching Jacob."


So people only reading the St. Autumn blog would be under the impression that a car was ruled out. Since the sheriff's comment is only available in archives with a paid subscription, not as many have access to that. I think that explains the discrepancy in our "facts". I guess, I'd take the sheriff's word over a blogger, JMO.

So, IMO, a car was never completely ruled out. As stated above, they probably never looked for the second freshest prints, or possibly the abductor parked elsewhere.

 

[bucshunter]

:goodpost:

And that is why I can not fully settle on ruling DR out.

I don't think you can rule anyone out but I'm not convicting anyone at this time either.

 

[bucshunter]

Here are a couple links, one in which the sheriff said it doesn't completely rule out a car being used, and one (by the St. Autumn blog) which states "In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward" - so I think that may be the source of our conflicting information. I'm not sure who runs (or ran) the St. Autumn blog, although I've always thought (so, JMO) it was an early blog of Joy's since both blogs share identical photos, and Joy has a copyright notice to prevent anyone else using her photos - excepting the photos she took from the St. Cloud Times, of course. If anyone knows it is someone else's blog, please feel free to correct that.

Here is the link to the sheriff's comment:
"This does not completely eliminate the possibility that a vehicle was used, although in light of the new information that possibility has diminished,'' the Sheriff's Office said." (Photo of full article at link)
http://s100.photobucket.com/user/shergal1/media/Screenshot2015-01-09at93150PM.png.html?sort=4&o=42
- Mpls. Star Tribune, Feb. 27, 2004
From newsmax.com archives: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives/


Here is the link to the St. Autumn comments:
"In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward to tell the police he had left the tire tracks in the driveway after hearing about the abduction on a police scanner and rushed to the scene in his car leaving the tire tracks behind. The driver told authorities that in 1989 he had given his name and explanation for being there to an officer at the abduction scene. No record of the conversation exists though. Also, the boys did not see or hear a vehicle that night of the abduction, so the police believe that the abductor got away with Jacob on foot, which would make the abductor someone local."
(This quote is directly under the photos of what Jacob was wearing when taken.)
http://saintautumn.wordpress.com/

This comment appears near the bottom of that same link.
"October 2003: The driver of a long-sought vehicle comes forward. Authorities rule him out as a suspect in the abduction. The theory of the case changes, leading investigators to focus on local suspects who could’ve been on foot when snatching Jacob."


So people only reading the St. Autumn blog would be under the impression that a car was ruled out. Since the sheriff's comment is only available in archives with a paid subscription, not as many have access to that. I think that explains the discrepancy in our "facts". I guess, I'd take the sheriff's word over a blogger, JMO.

So, IMO, a car was never completely ruled out. As stated above, they probably never looked for the second freshest prints, or possibly the abductor parked elsewhere.

Thank you.

 

[shergal]

It look as if the St. Cloud Times played a part in confusing the issue also...

PorchlightUSA - February 19, 2008 01:59 AM (GMT)

Police ask people to help in Wetterling case

The Stearns County Sheriff's Department issued a statement Wednesday urging people to call authorities with information about the 1989 abduction of Jacob Wetterling.

The statement came after sheriff's officials said earlier this week that they were refocusing the case.

A new theory that the kidnapper could have been on foot and lived near the rural St. Joseph abduction site has developed.

New information from the driver of a long-sought vehicle reportedly seen at the abduction site allowed investigators to rule out the involvement of that vehicle in the abduction. ... More at link:
http://z13.invisionfree.com/PorchlightUSA/ar/t7538.htm

Carefully reading this, you notice they just ruled out THAT vehicle. If people were just skimming the paper, they may have assumed all vehicles were ruled out.

 

[Sleutherish]

Personally, I don't think DR could have disguised his voice as the perp's is described.

I also think it sounds like LE was delayed in focusing on the prints & sloppy @ preserving the crime scene. They couldn't find a local (Kevin) whom had driven on brand new tires on the driveway; he had to come forward himself, be it 15 years later. That causes me to put little faith in whether LE "ruled out all other tracks".

I just do not feel DR is the guilty party here.

 

[Dave K]

Personally, I don't think DR could have disguised his voice as the perp's is described.

I also think it sounds like LE was delayed in focusing on the prints & sloppy @ preserving the crime scene. They couldn't find a local (Kevin) whom had driven on brand new tires on the driveway; he had to come forward himself, be it 15 years later. That causes me to put little faith in whether LE "ruled out all other tracks".

I just do not feel DR is the guilty party here.

Nice post.

On your first point, about DR disguising his voice. I agree with that, and have another aspect of it that, to me, is somewhat significant. It's something that I have to say almost jokingly, but, I do think that it's somewhat meaningful. The perp was described as speaking in an authoritative manner. I expect some will disagree with this, and maybe even point to his being a teacher for many years; but, personally, I don't think that DR could speak in an authoritative manner if he was paid for it. That's just the way I see it, and I know that it's just personal interpretation.

On your middle paragraph. I also agree. It appears you're somewhat new on the board, at least as a poster. I did a pretty lengthy post a while back, and probably a couple since then that express pretty much the same thing; about the new tires and all.

I also don't think that DR is the perpetrator, but, not ready to make that argument with specifics, just making a statement that that's my opinion.

 

[chaplain1]

Dave, do you know him?

 

[cGorg]

Let's suppose regarding the tire tracks...LE was on the scene, looking at Jacobs footprints seeming to go directly to a fresh tire track. They take casts of Jacobs prints, the fresh tire track and the perps footprints. Tada! They have solved the case as soon as they can find the owner of the tire track, the freshest one on the driveway.

Years later Kevin comes forward and is ruled out as the perp. His were the freshest tire tracks on the driveway.

Did LE even look at the other prints on the driveway? Did they look at the SECOND freshest prints on the driveway? The ones that probably belong to Jacobs kidnapper? No, they said he must have been on foot. Why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe there WASN'T a set of SECOND freshest prints on the driveway. After all, if there were 2 sets of fresh prints....they were only 45-50 minutes apart.

 

[HEY YOU!]

Maybe there WASN'T a set of SECOND freshest prints on the driveway. After all, if there were 2 sets of fresh prints....they were only 45-50 minutes apart.

This is really a critical point. Dan stated that he saw a small blue car with close together lights drive all the way up and around his driveway at around the time of the abduction. There was a small woman or child with their hands over their face according to him. A small car with close together lights would definitely have a different tire track and likely the tires would be closer together. This would mean that there should be 2 fresh sets of prints up DR's driveway within 45-50 minute period of time. And with the smaller car, the tracks would lay differently and clearly in the driveway. Kevin's and the smaller blue car should both have fresh tire tracks in that driveway according to the statements of DR and Kevin. It really is the sticking point for me in a big way.

 

[Trino]

Do you mean someone other than DAH?

There are tons of molesters out there that we do not know about. Charges are dropped. They are not Level Three so there is no community announcement.

I was called to serve on a jury and the case was settled before the trial started.

We had to fill out a form because the crime was a sexual assault of a child. I had never heard of the guy.

There are so many walking among us that it is astounding.

And, this happened in Minnesota. A former neighbor sexually assaulted his pre-teen step-daughter, not just once, but over a period of 6 months. He was charged and ONLY SPENT 90 days in jail! It appears he went to counseling classes - yep, that will cure him for sure. As you said, no one really knows about a lot of cases, including this one, except a few ex-neighbors and relatives.

 

[Sasquatch321]

This is really a critical point. Dan stated that he saw a small blue car with close together lights drive all the way up and around his driveway at around the time of the abduction. There was a small woman or child with their hands over their face according to him. A small car with close together lights would definitely have a different tire track and likely the tires would be closer together. This would mean that there should be 2 fresh sets of prints up DR's driveway within 45-50 minute period of time. And with the smaller car, the tracks would lay differently and clearly in the driveway. Kevin's and the smaller blue car should both have fresh tire tracks in that driveway according to the statements of DR and Kevin. It really is the sticking point for me in a big way.

I think we are coming to a point that DR has lied, and one or two of these cars dont exist. Now who is the only person that would have to lie but the perpetrator?

 

[nmogren]

I think we are coming to a point that DR has lied, and one or two of these cars dont exist. Now who is the only person that would have to lie but the perpetrator?

I don't think that at all. My point is simply that LE probably took casts of the tire track that was near Jacobs last print and ignored all others.

I am strictly looking at the driveway scene and I think LE screwed up big time making assumptions that that tire track would lead to Jacob. It didn't. That is the consequence when you are narrow minded. There is a big chance you will miss something that could lead you to the solution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[human]

Anyone know if the dump site near the Kramer property was ever checked out? I imagine that property is private so even if someone had access to a search dog would not be able to check it out

Dumps have controlled access, at least where I live. The fences are high and there is no way in except through the guard house.

 

[human]

Here are a couple links, one in which the sheriff said it doesn't completely rule out a car being used, and one (by the St. Autumn blog) which states "In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward" - so I think that may be the source of our conflicting information. I'm not sure who runs (or ran) the St. Autumn blog, although I've always thought (so, JMO) it was an early blog of Joy's since both blogs share identical photos, and Joy has a copyright notice to prevent anyone else using her photos - excepting the photos she took from the St. Cloud Times, of course. If anyone knows it is someone else's blog, please feel free to correct that.

Here is the link to the sheriff's comment:
"This does not completely eliminate the possibility that a vehicle was used, although in light of the new information that possibility has diminished,'' the Sheriff's Office said." (Photo of full article at link)
http://s100.photobucket.com/user/shergal1/media/Screenshot2015-01-09at93150PM.png.html?sort=4&o=42
- Mpls. Star Tribune, Feb. 27, 2004
From newsmax.com archives: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives/


Here is the link to the St. Autumn comments:
"In 2003 the long held belief that the abductor took Jacob away in a car was abandoned when a man named Kevin, came forward to tell the police he had left the tire tracks in the driveway after hearing about the abduction on a police scanner and rushed to the scene in his car leaving the tire tracks behind. The driver told authorities that in 1989 he had given his name and explanation for being there to an officer at the abduction scene. No record of the conversation exists though. Also, the boys did not see or hear a vehicle that night of the abduction, so the police believe that the abductor got away with Jacob on foot, which would make the abductor someone local."
(This quote is directly under the photos of what Jacob was wearing when taken.)
http://saintautumn.wordpress.com/

This comment appears near the bottom of that same link.
"October 2003: The driver of a long-sought vehicle comes forward. Authorities rule him out as a suspect in the abduction. The theory of the case changes, leading investigators to focus on local suspects who could’ve been on foot when snatching Jacob."


So people only reading the St. Autumn blog would be under the impression that a car was ruled out. Since the sheriff's comment is only available in archives with a paid subscription, not as many have access to that. I think that explains the discrepancy in our "facts". I guess, I'd take the sheriff's word over a blogger, JMO.

So, IMO, a car was never completely ruled out. As stated above, they probably never looked for the second freshest prints, or possibly the abductor parked elsewhere.

To me, it says that the tire prints are accounted for, but that does not mean that a car was not used in some other type of scenario that does not involve the driveway.

 

[human]

I don't think that at all. My point is simply that LE probably took casts of the tire track that was near Jacobs last print and ignored all others.

I am strictly looking at the driveway scene and I think LE screwed up big time making assumptions that that tire track would lead to Jacob. It didn't. That is the consequence when you are narrow minded. There is a big chance you will miss something that could lead you to the solution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you really believe that the FBI and BCA are narrow minded?

Don't forget, they tracked down a man from Japan who had been at the ballroom that night.

But you believe they would not do the most basic of things which means looking at all tire prints?

 

[Trino]

To me, it says that the tire prints are accounted for, but that does not mean that a car was not used in some other type of scenario that does not involve the driveway.

This is my thoughts also, has been for years.

 

[Sasquatch321]

Do you really believe that the FBI and BCA are narrow minded?

Don't forget, they tracked down a man from Japan who had been at the ballroom that night.

But you believe they would not do the most basic of things which means looking at all tire prints?

The last thing a professional footprint analyst and LE have is tunnel vision. They followed a man to Japan.

 

[HEY YOU!]

To me, it says that the tire prints are accounted for, but that does not mean that a car was not used in some other type of scenario that does not involve the driveway.

Let's play out the scenario where a car is used but it was not parked or driven on DR driveway. Where would a car be able to park where the boys wouldn't see it on their way to and back from the store and where would it be walkable for the perp to walk Jacob to the car at gunpoint and where the boys would not see or hear it leave?

Locals, what is a plausible parking spot for the perp? Let's play out each scenario.