MN MN - Joshua Guimond, 20, Collegeville, 9 Nov 2002 - #2

[formerpolicestaff]

Many are related —via alcohol. I work at a University and it just happened again last month. They don’t always drown in the river. Sometimes their alcohol overdose results in their death by other means.
This theory sucked us all I for a while but I’ve let go of it, at least for the most part. Maybe there was one for some victims. You’ve done so much work with these other theories that has so more meat on the bone in terms of motivation and opportunity.

I get the alcohol thing, but the I-94 killer theory, I don't like the term "smiley face killers", but the I-94 theory think has some serious heft to it. The routes, travelled, the patterns in the movement, the men who go missing, how they go missing etc it's all too similar. It's more than similar, it's virtually identical. I can't shake it off no matter how hard I try.

I'm unable to go into detail but I seem to be wrong with one part of my overdose theory . I'm working on it every single day, that's pretty much all I can say at this point.

I've got weeks if not months of work to do. Some of my work I can publish and some I can't. I do hope we can all work together to get this solved. I believe it is possible to solve it.

 

[puzzleworldplanet]

i have been following the case for a long time i just joined please excuse my dyslexia I am not good at typign here is a profile i made last year but i didnt know where to put it. i am from MN but moved a long time ago

in 2002 the offender wouldhave been a slightly younger man than josh someone who was supposed to look up to Josh but saw him as a threat there was an conflict gconflict oing on in his mind. the offender wishes they were josh but were intimidated by him and developed a hatred for josh... it’s extremely likely that they had crossed paths and worked together in some capacity.
this man knew josh, but wasn’t his best friend. in fact he wasnot a friend at all.. he was likely shorter than Josh not quite as good looking didn’t have as many friends or accolades and felt inferior in comparison...

the offender intentionally traveled to the poker party under the veil of a nice guy who just wanted to have fun. unbeknown to others at the party, it was a ploy,,, a plan.a plot.he was not there by chance!!! the offenderlikely and very subtly urged josh real friends that josh should come to the party that night with the hope of getting josh there
the man in question is someone who had an affinity with the monks, even sympathy for the monks. he understood them and they understood him when no one else did. there is a high probability that this man is homosexual or bisexual and played on that in order to get privileges from a senior monk, and was granted access into the inner circle

the poker party was a chance to prove his loyalty to the monks.the offender is NOT likely to have a criminal record and has probably spoken to the sheriffs in the past and told a fraudulent description of the events at the poker party &played on the “nice guy” image he has mastered over the years...

academically the offender had the potential to go on and become a doctor or lawyer or professor he was still never quite as popular as Josh a jealou, disloyal person, a real life jekyl & hyde who wished it was his name and not jJosh that was being thrown around campus for being so successful at mock trial. tgis person will be cold calculated &depraved but on the surface he will appear friendly he hides it well so well that 21 years of silence has become reality for him!!!this man keeps a low profile and believes he has got away with it

 

[Bit of hope]

Some really good questions there, I'll try to answer each of them to the best of my ability.

1) I haven't got any sources/factual links for BW being the last person to run the incinerator - as far as I'm aware, I'm not even sure they'd have such a record. If they do - and it indeed showed that BW ran the incinerator on an off-day, that would be huge in this case. All I've got to go on is that BW had access to run an incinerator and reports say that an incinerator was used within days of Josh's disappearance on an off-day. Not sure we'll ever get more than that unfortunately.

2) I've attached the autopsy report to this post. And if this case wasn't so serious - It'd be hard not to read the autopsy like a comedy sketch, with the seemingly endless amount of injuries sustained for a "fall".

Now what's interesting about the autopsy, is that it says: "Cause of death: accidental probable" in the preliminary autopsy report. In the final report, there's no cause of death page.
I'm going to briefly break down Wollmering's injuries from his "fall"

• pulmonary edema - fluid on the lungs
• bloody mucus in nasal passages
• Right lateral rib fracture 4 and 5
• Haemorrhage of soft tissue (likely caused by rib fracture)
• Abrasions (varying sizes) on bridge of nose, left eyebrow, left frontal scalp, right temple, left ear - all of these abrasions, accumulatively would measure 8.0 x 6.0cm (that's huge)
• laceration on middle / right-side of head 2.3cm in length
• 2.0cm laceration which extends through the ear
• Scalp 4.0cm x 1.0cm laceration by ear
• Subgaleal hematoma (multiple)
• Skull fracture (long fracture)

Regarding a rib fracture - "Rib fractures occur when a significant enough force directed at the rib causes a break. Most rib fractures are due to direct penetrating or blunt trauma to the chest." Source: Rib Fracture - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf

It sounds to me like Wollmering was pushed. Hard. Multiple times. It doesn't sound like a fall.

3) True, no firm evidence it was him jogging - but the fact he was a keen jogger, the fact he was monitoring the Metten Court apartment, the fact there was a jogger sighted at midnight when Josh was sighted leaving Metten Court at 11:57 - it really only does point to one person that's "likely" to be jogging at that time, from that direction (heading towards campus). That's before you look at the FBI profile which matches Wollmering almost to the letter. Wollmering was not at all happy with AI for this (AI who published the profile) and demanded that "someone should talk to him" (I paraphrase, may not be an exact quote). That said - it's still completely possible to be someone else jogging, but the evidence we have strongly points to Wollmering in my opinion.

4) Now this is the real question and I'm at a crossroads. I believe one of my theories is correct. A) Josh had an overdose, his friends panicked as they had an illegal narcotics/ID thing going on, so they placed Josh in the dumpster. B) A monk (Wollmering?) used a ruse to get Josh alone, in a bad position to kill him in such a way that his paper never got out there

Which theory do I believe more? Despite the bizarre behaviour from the friends, and the deleting of data, sadly, I think it's the monk theory. But I'm 60/40. 60% monk theory, 40% overdose theory. I really do believe one of these theories is correct.

I'm afraid I don't have any more theories. I would be shocked (and I mean really shocked) if one of those two theories is completely wrong. Based on evidence we have from interviews, articles, documentaries, files on the monks etc etc I think those are the best 2 theories I've got.

5) Students usually have the choice on where to save e.g locally or on the server

As for where we go from here, I don't know. Interested to get more thoughts on this theory.

TL;DR - In short, I think Wollmering was likely to have been behind the foul play - as for why - it could have been Josh about to expose Wollmering by interviewing his victims, detailing what he/other monks did in Jamaica (Jamaica is known for paedophile activity) - and interestingly enough - Josh did visit Jamaica. I thought it was extremely interesting what I found when Andert became prior:

"The prior is to carry out respectfully what his abbot assigns to him, and do nothing contrary to the abbot's wishes or arrangements." (Rule 65:16)

It makes me feel like the Abbot had enough of Wollmering and wanted him gone, permanently. "Dead men don't talk" as they say - and I think that's the case with Wollmering.

Thank you. Interesting there is no conclusion about cause and manner of dead in the definitive report. I think Wollmering's death is very sketchy. How on earth could you get a broken rib (unless you fall from a height on to something really hard or someone jumps on you with a lot of force) and a cracked skull from a fall. To compare. I had to have a car driving into me, throwing me in the air, smashing me to the ground, to get a tiny crack in my skull. The monks had every reason to be hush hush about his death and an accidental fall was very conveniënt. Saying "probable accidental" is creating a very big question mark and should have been looked into more.

More upsetting is this, about the assistent medical examiner who did the autopsy.

Secret recordings reveal flawed death investigation

A Minnesota woman has serious doubts about the quality of the Ramsey County Medical Examiner's work after an autopsy following her brother's sudden death left her with more questions than answers.

www.fox9.com

An autopsy was done by Dr. Butch Huston, an assistant Ramsey County Medical Examiner.
He determined the cause of death was "complications of chronic ethanol use."
"We truly felt like he had a heart attack," Yvonne said.
She acknowledges her brother had liver disease from being a drinker, but questioned if that would cause him to suddenly collapse on to his bed and die.
When she took a closer look at his autopsy report, she had even more doubts.
"I mean those are blatant mistakes," Yvonne said.
The report showed Ladoucer's gallbladder was unremarkable, medical jargon for normal.
But in fact, his gallbladder had previously been removed in a surgery,
"Ok, well that is a huge discrepancy,” Yvonne said.
She spoke with the chief investigator at the medical examiner's office, and set up a meeting in person with Dr. Huston, who did the autopsy.
She secretly recorded all of her conversations.
"I don't believe he died from that," Yvonne can be heard saying on the recording.
As she shared her concerns with Huston, he suddenly offered to change the official death certificate.
Need I say more?

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Glad to come back and see a few more posts on this thread! Well, the mystery deepens, but at the same time, progress is being made.

Let's look at what we've got:

1) Josh goes missing after a poker party
2) Incinerator said to be run on an off day
3) Profile comes out which points to Wollmering
4) Wollmering dies under suspicious circumstances
5) Wollmering's autopsy report says "probable accident" and then this vanishes in the final report
6) The assistant examiner who performed Wollmering's autopsy performs an autopsy on a Minnesota man and outrageous medical mistakes are made in the autopsy report and is then willing to change it - this tells me that this man can be bought.
7) Metten Court has been knocked down
8) Original incinerator has been knocked down
9) Tunnel maps and other bits and pieces have been removed from Saint John's website
It all gets a little bit suspicious.

i have been following the case for a long time i just joined please excuse my dyslexia I am not good at typign here is a profile i made last year but i didnt know where to put it. i am from MN but moved a long time ago

in 2002 the offender wouldhave been a slightly younger man than josh someone who was supposed to look up to Josh but saw him as a threat there was an conflict gconflict oing on in his mind. the offender wishes they were josh but were intimidated by him and developed a hatred for josh... it’s extremely likely that they had crossed paths and worked together in some capacity.
this man knew josh, but wasn’t his best friend. in fact he wasnot a friend at all.. he was likely shorter than Josh not quite as good looking didn’t have as many friends or accolades and felt inferior in comparison...

the offender intentionally traveled to the poker party under the veil of a nice guy who just wanted to have fun. unbeknown to others at the party, it was a ploy,,, a plan.a plot.he was not there by chance!!! the offenderlikely and very subtly urged josh real friends that josh should come to the party that night with the hope of getting josh there
the man in question is someone who had an affinity with the monks, even sympathy for the monks. he understood them and they understood him when no one else did. there is a high probability that this man is homosexual or bisexual and played on that in order to get privileges from a senior monk, and was granted access into the inner circle

the poker party was a chance to prove his loyalty to the monks.the offender is NOT likely to have a criminal record and has probably spoken to the sheriffs in the past and told a fraudulent description of the events at the poker party &played on the “nice guy” image he has mastered over the years...

academically the offender had the potential to go on and become a doctor or lawyer or professor he was still never quite as popular as Josh a jealou, disloyal person, a real life jekyl & hyde who wished it was his name and not jJosh that was being thrown around campus for being so successful at mock trial. tgis person will be cold calculated &depraved but on the surface he will appear friendly he hides it well so well that 21 years of silence has become reality for him!!!this man keeps a low profile and believes he has got away with it

I have thought this too. No need to apologize for dyslexia!

So what you're saying is that we need to find someone Josh went to Saint John's with, potentially younger, and who maybe worked alongside him.

• full list of names of people at the poker party
• full list of names of people who attended Mock Trial

Where can we get a list of people who attended the poker party and took part in Mock Trial?

 

[Bit of hope]

Uncle Paul did NOT admit to using the washer program on the Simply Vanished podcast. He admitted to using email and doing internet searches however.

Paul Guimond (Josh's uncle), did admit he did searches for Josh and logged into his own webmail account. He denied installing washer software and said him nor Brian were savvy enough.

The only thing I’ve yet to fully understand is the 20+ minute conversation Josh had on the phone before he closed and deleted all of his Yahoo accounts from the computer. I don’t place huge value into this, but it would be highly interesting to know. Unfortunately the police don’t even know who Josh was calling as it was from a pre-paid card. That’s the only other bit of information I’m interested in.

I never used Yahoo! but it's a web portal, a website that provides a broad array of services, such as search engines, e-mail, online shopping, and forums. Was it easy to hack? What could have been the reason he deleted all (why have more then one?) his Yahoo accounts. Did is uncle had access to Josh's E-mail or do I misunderstood "and logged into his own webmail".

 

[formerpolicestaff]

The chances of Josh's uncle being hacked are slim to none - and by slim to none, I mean 0.05% (made up figure, but you get the idea). From what I understand after reading 7-8 different sites, watching the Netflix documentary and a few podcasts - Josh's uncle got to campus with Josh's parents the following day. Josh's Uncle and his Dad stayed in Josh's dorm room. Josh's Uncle logged onto his own Yahoo email account and searched for 'americas most wanted' amongst some other things (the rest of what he searched for is here: Josh Guimond)

On Josh Newville's podcast, Josh Newville asked Josh's uncle directly if he ran the washer software and Josh's uncle denied it. Here's the transcript from Simply Vanished | S1 E3 Terms of Service

I think the tone in Newville's voice said it all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Josh Newville: Well, so one of the things that's come up over the years and it's just trickled out at times, but in the days following Josh's disappearance, investigators didn't lock down his computer right away. It was just a different time. So, it took him I think three, four, five days or something like that to grab it. But within those first few days that you were there, you guys were using his computer to check your email and stuff like that while you were hanging out in his dorm room looking for him. Right?

Paul Guimond: Yes, exactly.

Josh Newville: Well, one of the things that we've learned is that in order to access the internet at St John's on one of those computers at that time, you needed a network login from a student or a staff member.

Josh Newville: And there's been some controversy surrounding the fact that a new user account was created on Josh's computer couple days after his disappearance under the name of one of his roommates. And that roommate says, "Hey, I just gave my login information, or I logged in for Josh's dad or his uncle, or something. And that's it. I never touched the computer again."

Josh Newville: And it seems like some of what he's saying here must have some truth to it. Because for example, when we're looking at the history here, we can see that you checked your email. You logged into your Yahoo email and you looked for your nephew on Amber Alerts, and America's most wanted, and stuff like that. Right?

Paul Guimond: Yeah. I mean, I remember like it's today. I remember doing all that.

Josh Newville: Gotchya. So, in that immediate timeframe, in that same few minutes even, there was also a search for an Internet Washer on the computer and a file compressor, a zip software. It's not quite clear to what level stuff was deleted. It does seem like stuff was deleted from the computer at that point.

Josh Newville: And so, there's been a lot of questions as to, was this done by that roommate, or the one whose username that was created was brand new, or was this maybe done by family as some sort of impression management, wanting to make sure that they got something off the computer that might be embarrassing-

Paul Guimond: Yep, I understand all that.

Josh Newville: ... for Josh or something? Or was it nefarious? Maybe someone trying to cover up foul play or something like that. And as we're trying to dig in and understand all of this, I wanted to ask you, was this you? I mean, you're obviously logged into your email basically the same time. You and/or Brian, did you guys download this stuff and try to delete stuff for-

Paul Guimond: No, I did not have any clue of that.

Josh Newville: All right. So, we keep looking.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I've re-reading a few pages of posts from this thread and some blogs and whatnot. And thinking about the Josh Newville podcast I posted about earlier. I think the hot-topic for a long time has been the computer. But honestly, I don't think that's how we move forward.

I am blown away that the photographs that the SCSO released haven't had people calling in saying "hey it's me in the photo" or "I was on yahoo personals too but I never spoke to Josh".

Are there any laws that allow US citizens to force the sheriff's departments to make information public? If there's a computer that likely had a lead on, it would be Bruce Wollmering's computer.

 

[Bit of hope]

I've re-reading a few pages of posts from this thread and some blogs and whatnot. And thinking about the Josh Newville podcast I posted about earlier. I think the hot-topic for a long time has been the computer. But honestly, I don't think that's how we move forward.

I am blown away that the photographs that the SCSO released haven't had people calling in saying "hey it's me in the photo" or "I was on yahoo personals too but I never spoke to Josh".

Are there any laws that allow US citizens to force the sheriff's departments to make information public? If there's a computer that likely had a lead on, it would be Bruce Wollmering's computer.

It's funny. When I woke up this morning I was exactly thinking that about the pictures. Why nobody came forward? I know from other cases where LE showed pictures that there were mostly always people who came in the air to tell LE they were alive and kicking. Maybe just a weird thought. Could this men have been people who have been abused by Catholic priests when they were younger and Josh met them on Forums or the like?

 

[formerpolicestaff]

It's funny. When I woke up this morning I was exactly thinking that about the pictures. Why nobody came forward? I know from other cases where LE showed pictures that there were mostly always people who came in the air to tell LE they were alive and kicking. Maybe just a weird thought. Could this men have been people who have been abused by Catholic priests when they were younger and Josh met them on Forums or the like?

It's very possible that they were victims of Catholic priests but I have a small theory on it, and why they've not came forward..

Personally, I think some of them are from the yahoo personals site. And I think some of the profiles on yahoo personals were bound to be fake. As in, let's say you set up a fake yahoo personals dating app, but you've done a search online and used a guys photo, and the guy lives in France, or Germany, or Norway - they'd never see these photos and never be aware someone stole their identity for a dating site.

As a non-American, I can look at the photos and see that some of the photos are of American men, I can tell by their facial structure, their clothes, the background of the photo etc. In fact that's what I'll do next. You've gave me an idea.

 

[Bit of hope]

It's very possible that they were victims of Catholic priests but I have a small theory on it, and why they've not came forward..

Personally, I think some of them are from the yahoo personals site. And I think some of the profiles on yahoo personals were bound to be fake. As in, let's say you set up a fake yahoo personals dating app, but you've done a search online and used a guys photo, and the guy lives in France, or Germany, or Norway - they'd never see these photos and never be aware someone stole their identity for a dating site.

As a non-American, I can look at the photos and see that some of the photos are of American men, I can tell by their facial structure, their clothes, the background of the photo etc. In fact that's what I'll do next. You've gave me an idea.

I found this about personals. If a paid subscription was needed there must be some traced of it in Josh's financial documents, but maybe he had a premium subscription and this was included.

The Yahoo! Personals editions were designed in local languages. Contacting a member through Yahoo! Personals required a paid subscription to Yahoo! Personals. Yahoo! Personals ceased operations on July 21, 2010.

Yahoo mail was free.

Brings me back to my earlier question. Josh seems to have closed all of his Yahoo accounts at a certain moment in time. Why would somebody have multiple Yahoo accounts?

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I found this about personals. If a paid subscription was needed there must be some traced of it in Josh's financial documents, but maybe he had a premium subscription and this was included.

The Yahoo! Personals editions were designed in local languages. Contacting a member through Yahoo! Personals required a paid subscription to Yahoo! Personals. Yahoo! Personals ceased operations on July 21, 2010.

Yahoo mail was free.

Brings me back to my earlier question. Josh seems to have closed all of his Yahoo accounts at a certain moment in time. Why would somebody have multiple Yahoo accounts?

Exactly. If it was a paid service, then credit/debit card payments would link the people Josh allegedly talked to, and finding them wouldn't be all that difficult, assuming they're all still around today. Stuff we know for a fact:

1) Josh created two accounts - gwengirlbigjuggs and coochiecoochiecoo2002 (I believe, may need to go back to the episode and check I got the names right)
2) On October 28, 2002, Josh had a 27-minute phone call with an unidentified person, reported a user on Yahoo! Personals for misconduct, and deleted all three accounts. Two weeks later, he vanished (Source: here)
3) In the source above, all of the photographs were allegedly saved throughout the month of October on Josh's computer
4) The pontiac driver was not in any of the 28 photographs

 

[Bit of hope]

Exactly. If it was a paid service, then credit/debit card payments would link the people Josh allegedly talked to, and finding them wouldn't be all that difficult, assuming they're all still around today. Stuff we know for a fact:

1) Josh created two accounts - gwengirlbigjuggs and coochiecoochiecoo2002 (I believe, may need to go back to the episode and check I got the names right)
2) On October 28, 2002, Josh had a 27-minute phone call with an unidentified person, reported a user on Yahoo! Personals for misconduct, and deleted all three accounts. Two weeks later, he vanished (Source: here)
3) In the source above, all of the photographs were allegedly saved throughout the month of October on Josh's computer
4) The pontiac driver was not in any of the 28 photographs

To me it's obvious he proposed as a woman, girl with the names of the accounts (big juggs and coochie = slang for vagina/vulva) A sick thing to do if you ask me and least questionable behavior. Or was he trying to lure someone from the university in? Seeing who took the bait?

 

[Bit of hope]

I think it's odd Josh reported a user of Yahoo! Personals for misconduct, while he was the one misusing the service, pretending to be a woman/girl. My guess is he didn't use his own picture on his profile. It's a bit much and I read it quickly for now, but this is an interesting read:

https://www.eff.org/files/anthony-v-yahoo.pdf

Just to stay open minded. Could Josh have been collecting false profiles or profiles of former members of the service?

 

[formerpolicestaff]

To me it's obvious he proposed as a woman, girl with the names of the accounts (big juggs and coochie = slang for vagina/vulva) A sick thing to do if you ask me and least questionable behavior. Or was he trying to lure someone from the university in? Seeing who took the bait?

The things from the netflix documentary stick in my mind - the episode aired with Dana saying even she thinks Josh had secrets. What those secrets are, is anyones guess I think. The fact he was on Yahoo Personals tells me that he was either A) gathering evidence of people who had been abused by Saint Johns or Catholic Priests B) Flirting for fun C) Trolling people online with fake profiles. However, one thing is clear: Josh was definitely up to something on Yahoo Personals. Is it relevant? I'm not sure and I'll need to read up on Yahoo Personals and understand it some more - I haven't ever used it, but I know someone who did use it, so I am learning about how it worked, and how the webcams could be used.

I think it's odd Josh reported a user of Yahoo! Personals for misconduct, while he was the one misusing the service, pretending to be a woman/girl. My guess is he didn't use his own picture on his profile. It's a bit much and I read it quickly for now, but this is an interesting read:

https://www.eff.org/files/anthony-v-yahoo.pdf

Just to stay open minded. Could Josh have been collecting false profiles or profiles of former members of the service?

You've brought up a great point and a point that I think is actually relevant to the entire case. Do the police know for a fact that Josh reported someone? If they do, why did they not contact Yahoo and ask for details of the report itself, who it was against and why? That could very, very easily be the answer to this entire case (it also might not be), but once again, because of shoddy police work, we'll probably never know.

It's really almost impossible to know what Josh was doing on Yahoo Personals. Your idea is very, very plausible. He also could have been flirting with them, or arranging meetups, it's just almost impossible to know. It sounds like the police don't know either.

I'm going to spend a little time today reading up on Yahoo Personals, reading the link you sent and trying to figure out what the report system was like. For example, when you report somebody, do you have to write why? Or was it a basic pre-made list you had to select from, in order to report someone, for example: "User swore at me" or "User was aggressive" etc

 

[OnlyS]

Exactly. If it was a paid service, then credit/debit card payments would link the people Josh allegedly talked to, and finding them wouldn't be all that difficult, assuming they're all still around today. Stuff we know for a fact:

1) Josh created two accounts - gwengirlbigjuggs and coochiecoochiecoo2002 (I believe, may need to go back to the episode and check I got the names right)
2) On October 28, 2002, Josh had a 27-minute phone call with an unidentified person, reported a user on Yahoo! Personals for misconduct, and deleted all three accounts. Two weeks later, he vanished (Source: here)
3) In the source above, all of the photographs were allegedly saved throughout the month of October on Josh's computer
4) The pontiac driver was not in any of the 28 photographs

Sherriff asks for help identifying photos in Joshua Guimond cold case

Maple Lake native Joshua Guimond was 20 at the time of his Nov. 9, 2002 disappearance from the St. John's University campus.

eu.sctimes.com

I have always felt that some of the photos look like they could be pictures of the same person. So different photos of themselves over time that the people had uploaded to their profile.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Sherriff asks for help identifying photos in Joshua Guimond cold case

Maple Lake native Joshua Guimond was 20 at the time of his Nov. 9, 2002 disappearance from the St. John's University campus.

eu.sctimes.com

I have always felt that some of the photos look like they could be pictures of the same person. So different photos of themselves over time that the people had uploaded to their profile.

What I don't get is that police had those photos since 2004? Why wait until 20 years after his disappearance to suddenly announce it. Brian was right, it was just purely to make it look like they're doing something.

The SCSO should let the public know on their website how many of the men in the photos have been found and cleared.

Something has been bugging me about the case though, and it's not the pictures, it's the paper that Nick said Josh was writing. It strikes me as extremely odd, and I mean unbelievably, extremely odd that the paper was never found.

That tells me: 1) josh planned to write it but hadn't, 2) Nick was lying or 3) Someone high up deleted it.

I'd like Nick to say what was on it, did he see it? Did he see Josh writing it? Was it definitely on the computer before Josh went missing?

This entire case stinks of corruption. Not allowing sniffer dogs to search the abbey - how was that even a choice? Releasing pics that they've known about for 20 years? Not releasing the findings for Wollmering's computer despite him being credibly accused? Wollmering's death and autopsy cover up. It really begs the question, if Josh did write a paper, just what dirt did he have on them? From the outside looking in, it's rotten to the core, from the inside looking out I can't imagine.

Sometimes I do wonder whether Josh uncovered something Epstein-level secret and he was silenced.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

I also struggle to believe some of the words that come out of Klassen's mouth:

Five years ago, in the wake of nationwide allegations of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, the Abbey’s leader, Abbot John Klassen, publicly acknowledged that the Abbey restricts and oversees the lives of up to 15 monks who could pose a risk to the community due to sexual misconduct. The misconduct ranges from to accusations of rape and murder. Klassen defended criticism by noting that when the monks are living at the Abbey, “they are in our community, and the public doesn’ t have to worry about what is happening in the larger community,” Klassen told the St. Cloud Times. (Source: here)

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Ok. I've been thinking all day. Non-stop. I've re-visited my overdose theory and I think it's so damn close to the truth. I think it's almost, but not quite there. So let's think about this some more. For me - there's two facts that I think have been staring us in the face the entire time. We've all probably not paid enough attention to the following facts:

1) Josh didn't know everyone at that party
2) Josh got an invite seemingly randomly

And about point 2: Don't you think that was weird? The one night he gets an invite to a party, with several people he doesn't know is the night he goes missing and is never seen again????? To me, that's the definition of pre-meditated.

Therefore my suspicion is that the "plan" was to make Josh believe it's a random invite, when it was not. By making Josh think it's a spontaneous invite, he's excited, his guard is down, there's no time to plan, no time for second thoughts. Want a drink? Sure!

That's when he takes a drink and 5-10 mins later he starts feeling unusual, unusual enough to leave the party. He doesn't say anything because he can't. The rohypnol now fully kicks in and then he's grabbed once he gets outside Metten Court and past the bridge, by the accomplice monk working with a guy in the poker party.

Wollmering was likely to the jogger witnessed by a car running towards campus at midnight. Wollmering was one of the only people who could use the incinerator and apparently it was used on an off day. Josh's scent was at the abbey. The abbey refused entry. 2 weeks later when the bloodhound got permission to go in, Josh's scent was found inside the abbey. Josh's Dad was banned from Campus for 2 years. Fast forward another 5 years and Wollmering dies suspiciously.

I believe the suspects are a monk and an accomplice student.

Now, why would a monk and another student be working together. That is the million dollar question that we need to figure out for my theory to be right. Write your answers on a postcard below.

 

[formerpolicestaff]

Now, why would a monk and another student be working together. That is the million dollar question that we need to figure out for my theory to be right. Write your answers on a postcard below.

Can you believe this? (Not for the faint of heart! Grooming letters from Andert to his victims.) This is the same guy who was on the dorm of Metten Court when Josh was a student. Abuse going back to the 70's and he's still prior to this current day.

Anyone have any ideas why a monk would be working with a student in order to grab Josh? Groomed perhaps like in the letter above?!

 

[Bit of hope]

Can you believe this? (Not for the faint of heart! Grooming letters from Andert to his victims.) This is the same guy who was on the dorm of Metten Court when Josh was a student. Abuse going back to the 70's and he's still prior to this current day.

Anyone have any ideas why a monk would be working with a student in order to grab Josh? Groomed perhaps like in the letter above?!

For the love of God.....What the heck is going on down there?