1089 users online (239 members and 850 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 64 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 949
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    21,144

    MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 *ARREST* - #9

    http://fox17online.com/2013/04/27/no...#axzz2Rh8KOqEk

    "NORTON SHORES, Mich- The Norton Shores Police Department is investigating a missing person which occurred in late evening hours of April 26, 2013 at the Exxon Mobil gas station located at 1196 E. Sternberg Rd. Around 11:15 p.m. Norton Shores Police officers were dispatched to the gas station on a suspicious activity report. Customers called 911 after entering the store to find no employees present. The employee scheduled to be working, Jessica Heeringa, was not able to be located.
    Contact has been made with friends and family of 25 year old Jessica Heeringa but as of April 27, 2013 at 2:00 pm Jessica has not been located.
    Jessica is described as a white female, 25 years old, 5’1 tall, approximately 110 lbs., blond shoulder length hair, and blue eyes. Jessica is also known to wear wired rim glasses. She may be wearing a blue collared shirt saying “Sternberg Exxon”.
    Anyone who may have witnessed suspicious activity near the Exxon Mobil gas station is asked to contact Silent Observer at 231-72-CRIME[IMG]resource://skype_ff_extension-at-jetpack/skype_ff_extension/data/call_skype_logo.png[/IMG]231-72-CRIME (231-722-7463[IMG]resource://skype_ff_extension-at-jetpack/skype_ff_extension/data/call_skype_logo.png[/IMG]231-722-7463) or call 911."




    Suspect sketch



    Thread #1
    Thread #2
    Thread #3
    Thread #4
    Thread #5
    Thread #6
    Thread #7
    Thread #8

    Link to article discussing fake sketch: http://www.wzzm13.com/story/local/2013/05/01/1598280/

    Scanner Thread for Jessica

    Media & Map threadCall
    Send SMS
    Add to Skype
    You'll need Skype CreditFree via Skype
    Last edited by bessie; 09-16-2014 at 01:38 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Who Dat Nation
    Posts
    29,857
    Please continue the discussion here.

    __________________________________
    Muddy water in the street
    ; Muddy water 'round my feet... as sung by the inimitable Bessie Smith, "Muddy Water (A Mississippi Moan)"

    WEBSLEUTHS ON FACEBOOK



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    65
    Bumping for Jessica

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,077
    I reluctantly have come to the conclusion Jessica was taken by the sex industry. A young lady can bring 300,000 dollars. IMO

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    2,882
    Unfortunately, I think she was killed and her body has not been found yet. She could have been kidnapped, killed, and taken anywhere, even out of state, and dumped in a remote area. I hope I am wrong and that one day she turns up somewhere alive and well.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    Can we get posts from the other thread brought over?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    231
    I have been trying to catch up on this story, Never heard of it before until it was mentioned in another thread Im reading, but just read the entire 1st and 2nd thread, before i just skipped to the end. I cant believe after all this time she has never been found. It took me hours to even read through one thread so i dont have time to read all 8 so was just wondering if someone could catch me up about what ever happened with the 911 call saying there was 2 other vehicles there, Im assuming one was Jessicas, but what about the other? was it still there when the police arrived. Also I feel like she was lured outside somehow, because wasnt the cash drawer open like she was counting it? There had to have been a reason she stopped doing that and went outside without locking the money up, which makes me feel like it was definitely someone known to her who she felt safe enough to go out there with.
    Also Im sure it has been resolved but a few times i read in the 2nd thread people questioning the 911 caller, just wanted to point out he hadnt pumped the gas, from what i read he COULDNT pump it because there was no one there. I think the attendant has to press a button to let the gas pump be used, I know thats what happens where i live. If they dont press the button then nothing comes out when you are pressing the handle.
    And lastly just a comment, why on earth would the coworker drive past and notice something suspicious and then drive off! That whole story seems off. Why not just do a quick drive by in the actual gas station to just make sure Jessica was ok. I mean if she took so much notice of his appaearance and knew it was a bit odd, why just drive off when he leaves, that is so weird to me!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,077
    There is no evidence Jessica is deceased. Thus like the Chief of Police I will assume she is alive. This leaves one man keeping her captive and the sex industry. From people I know from that area that are now in California .the industry is very active.
    . ...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    Exxon map link in case someone wants to try to map it.

    Here’s the timeline, released by the Norton Shores Police Department:

    April 26, 2013:
    2:44 p.m.: Heeringa purchased groceries at Aldi, 2715 Henry St.
    4:35 p.m.: Heeringa begins her shift at the Exxon store. She was aware the store did not have video cameras, as she had advised customers of this and the fact she was working alone. She was not worried about the lack of cameras. It was not uncommon for Heeringa to prop open the rear door and turn off the store’s rear security light so she could smoke cigarettes behind the store or allow friends to enter via the rear door, according to police.
    7:30 – 8:15 p.m.: A man who told police he was Heeringa's boyfriend at the time (*Not to be confused with her fiance, Dakotah Quail-Dyer) arrived at the Exxon station in a work vehicle, a silver full-size van. The two reportedly had a discussion regarding their alleged relationship.
    A customer advised that Heeringa appeared to be upset after the conversation with the male subject.
    7:40 – 8:50 p.m.: A female friend entered the store through the front door to visit Heeringa. Nothing suspicious was noticed at that time.
    Both the female friend and a male customer observed a bluish silver van pull up to Heeringa while she was changing the receipt paper in one of the pumps. It appeared that the male driver and Heeringa were having a friendly conversation.
    10:55 p.m.: A female customer entered the store and purchased a lighter. She advised that Heeringa was alone in the store and did not appear to be nervous or distressed. The customer did not see anyone in the store or in the parking lot.
    11 p.m.: An Exxon manager and her husband were riding their motorcycles eastbound on Sternberg Road.
    She saw a silver minivan slowly enter the north drive of the Exxon station from the service drive of the Pointes Mall.
    The van drove behind the Exxon station, did a u-turn and extinguished its headlights as it pulled behind the store facing west.
    The manager suspected Heeringa may be in the process of stealing from Exxon, so she turned around on Harvey Street to return to the store.
    The manager and her husband drove to the Pointes Mall, west of the Exxon station, and parked in the lot with a view of the north and west sides of the Exxon station. The minivan was parked on the north side of the Exxon station.
    There were no other vehicles in the lot except for Heeringa's.
    The manager saw a figure standing at the rear of the van and noticed the van’s rear hatch was open. The figure shut the rear hatch and quickly opened it again. It appeared as though the figure was adjusting something in the rear of the van, and then closed the hatch again. She noted that the person's head was just above the roof of the van.
    The person then walked to the driver’s door, got into the van and began driving westbound on the service drive.
    The manager said the store’s rear security light was not on and the store’s rear door did not open at any time. She never saw a struggle or heard anyone yell for help. She did not see Heeringa outside of the store.
    As the van drove closer to their location in the parking lot, the manager and her husband started their motorcycles and pulled up to the service drive. As the van passed, she looked at the driver, a male subject wearing a red or orange sweatshirt. Her husband stated that he did not see the subject well, but did see that he had “crazy” or wavy hair. Neither of them saw Heeringa or anyone else in the van.
    The manager and her husband pulled onto the service drive and followed the van until it stopped at Grand Haven Road. The manager’s husband stated that he was positive the van was a Chrysler Town and Country van, silver in color, as it was the same type a relative owned (Note: This vehicle was located and was in Traverse City at the time of the abduction). He clearly remembered the Town and Country logo on the rear hatch door. Neither obtained the license plate number, as they had no reason to believe a crime had occurred.
    The van turned northbound on Grand Haven Road, while the manager and her husband turned southbound on Grand Haven Road and went home.
    11:02 p.m: Surveillance video from inside of a closed store in the Pointes Mall captured a silver minivan turning northbound onto Grand Haven Road.
    11:03 p.m: Surveillance video from the Homestead Tavern captured a silver minivan driving northbound on Grand Haven Road.
    11:05 p.m: Surveillance video from the Coin Zone captured a silver minivan driving northbound on Grand Haven Road.
    11:10 p.m: A male customer arrived at the gas station, pulled up to the pump and attempted to purchase gasoline. He was unable to do so as the pump would not activate. When the pump did not activate, he entered the store believing that the clerk may have been in the back room and not aware of his presence at the pump. He was unable to locate Heeringa. Upon exiting the store, he spoke with a female customer and called 911.
    11:15 p.m.: Patrol units are dispatched to Exxon, 1196 E Sternberg Road, Norton Shores, regarding a suspicious situation.
    11:25 p.m.: The first officer arrives and begins investigation. Officers searched the store but did not locate Heeringa. Officers located Heeringa's purse and jacket in the back room. The purse contained $420 in cash. Officers noted that nothing inside the store indicated a struggle. There was nothing that appeared to be disturbed. Officers exited the rear door and noted that the door did not have a handle on the outside.
    Officers located items of possible evidence outside the rear door, including what appeared to be a 2-inch by 3-inch blood stain on the concrete, later determined to be Heeringa's. Officers photographed the interior and exterior of the store and evidence items prior to collection. Officers collected a sample of the possible blood stain and packaged the other evidence items.
    11.38 p.m.: Exxon owner was contacted regarding the open store. He in turn contacted the day-shift manager to respond as she lives closer to the store.
    11:50 p.m.: The day-shift manager arrives at the Exxon station and provides officers with her observations of the silver minivan and its driver.
    The manager advised that the cash drawer was “counted down” for the next shift, indicating Heeringa was preparing to close the store. While talking to officers, the manager observed the man claiming to be Heeringa's boyfriend drive past the store in a work vehicle. He was contacted to come to the Exxon station and was questioned by officers.
    12:38 a.m.: A K-9 team requested to search area. A search of the area north and east of the store was conducted with no results.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    post #1069

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    I want to try to get even stricter with the timeframe so we can see how tight it was--because I was a little loose with it before. And I happened upon a revelation.

    According to the official timeline:

    At 10:55pm, a girl enters to buy a lighter. Not exits . . . but enters. So, she probably didn't leave the store until 10:56pm, and if she's really picky about her lighters which smokers can be, maybe not till 10:57pm. Well the T & C van was spotted at the Homestead Tavern going north on Grand Haven at 11:03pm and that's 1.1 miles away. According to Google, if you follow the speed limit, it takes 2.1 minutes to get there from the Exxon.

    So, if I add, subtract, divide, carry the one, etc. that means that the abduction took place between 10:57pm and 11:01pm because Jessica was still alive when the lighter girl left the store--with her approximate exit time of 10:57 (This will be important later). I guess what I'm saying is by the time the next customer showed up at 11:10pm, Jesscia was LONG gone.

    Now, the problem with all this? The manager claims she saw the van pull into the Exxon at 11pm--that's according to the official time line that the police themselves have okay'ed.

    I'm sorry--kick me off Websleuths or whatever--but that's just not possible. That has to be a lie, and at best a horrible error on the manager's and the police's part.

    There is absolutely no way at 11pm the manager saw the van pull in, then she rode the whole way down to Harvey, turned around, got back to the mall parking lot, parked, shut off her motorcycle, and the van was still behind the Exxon. There's no way. Because at 11:03pm the Town and Country was seen at the Homestead Tavern 1.1 miles away--And for the Town and Country to be at the Homestead Tavern at 11:03pm, it had to leave the Exxon at 11:01pm.

    Meaning, if you believe the timeline, the manager and her husband drove the whole way down to Harvey and back in under a minute. Not possible. Absolutely not possible. Simplified: She saw the van at 11pm, drives the whole down to Harvey and back, and it's only 11:01pm. Not possible.

    The distance from the Exxon to Harvey is roughly a half mile. According to the timeline, the manager saw the van on the service road pulling into the Exxon as she was going east on Sternberg. So, more than likely, if the mgr is to be believed, she and her husband were at the intersection of Sternberg and Grand Haven when she originally saw the van. So, we have to add on at least 800ft to the half mile distance.

    So, to travel from the Sternberg/Grand Haven intersection to Harvey and then back to the mall is about a mile and a quarter. Even if the mgr and her husband averaged 60mph going the whole way to Harvey and back they couldn't do it under a minute. And it's a Friday night and you know they probably hit a red light at Harvey.

    By the way, the speed limit on Sternberg? 45mph and it's a reduced speed of 35mph in the section just west of the mall.

    I've never been to Norton Shores, MI but I think the avg time the manager and her husband could've made it down to Harvey and back to the mall parking lot, starting from the Sternberg/Grand Haven intersection, is 3 minutes on a Friday night, especially if they got a red arrow at Harvey.

    So, the manager didn't originally see the van at 11pm. More likely, the first glimpse she got of it was at more like 10:55pm. I know, that doesn't seem like a big difference but it is. So, I give her 3 minutes to get down to Harvey, u-turn, and come back. So, it's 10:58pm when she gets back to the mall. The mgr and her husband park. The guy is standing by his van. He fumbles around with something in the back of the van and leaves at 11:01pm.

    Now, why is this all relevant? Because if the manager saw the van pulling into the Exxon at 10:55pm, it means the van was pulling in at the same time the girl was going inside to get a lighter. In fact, the two might've entered the Exxon parking lot at the same time except from different directions. Meaning, the van was already in the back of the store while the girl was buying the lighter.

    The problem? The manager in the timeline approved by the police--I have to say that again because it drives me crazy--never mentions seeing any other customers going into or out of the store. Doesn't mention any other cars in the parking lot despite we know for a fact a car was in the parking lot at 10:55pm--the car of the girl buying the lighter.

    The other point is the driver of the van had to see that other car in the parking lot at 10:55pm. And he approached the Exxon anyway. And that's scary given what we now know.

    Also what backs up my scenario? A camera spotted the Town and Country in the mall parking lot at 11:02pm. So, it leaves the Exxon at 11:01pm. Drives slowly through parking lot and onto the service road, is seen by the 11:02pm camera at the mall, pulls onto Grand Haven and speeds up to be seen on the 11:03pm camera at the Homestead Tavern.

    What's always bothered me about this case when I became interested in it was the timeline. How the van happened to show up at just the right time that no one was at the store. I think an analysis of this timeline shows the van showed up when a customer was in the store. Probably the guy was peeking into the back of the store from the rear exit and waited until the lighter girl left. And I think the manager should be nailed down a little more precisely on her timeline because every cash register and camera contradicts her 11pm original sighting.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    507
    Quote Originally Posted by Roselvr View Post
    Exxon map link in case someone wants to try to map it.

    Here’s the timeline, released by the Norton Shores Police Department:

    April 26, 2013:
    2:44 p.m.: Heeringa purchased groceries at Aldi, 2715 Henry St.
    4:35 p.m.: Heeringa begins her shift at the Exxon store. She was aware the store did not have video cameras, as she had advised customers of this and the fact she was working alone. She was not worried about the lack of cameras. It was not uncommon for Heeringa to prop open the rear door and turn off the store’s rear security light so she could smoke cigarettes behind the store or allow friends to enter via the rear door, according to police.
    7:30 – 8:15 p.m.: A man who told police he was Heeringa's boyfriend at the time (*Not to be confused with her fiance, Dakotah Quail-Dyer) arrived at the Exxon station in a work vehicle, a silver full-size van. The two reportedly had a discussion regarding their alleged relationship.
    A customer advised that Heeringa appeared to be upset after the conversation with the male subject.
    7:40 – 8:50 p.m.: A female friend entered the store through the front door to visit Heeringa. Nothing suspicious was noticed at that time.
    Both the female friend and a male customer observed a bluish silver van pull up to Heeringa while she was changing the receipt paper in one of the pumps. It appeared that the male driver and Heeringa were having a friendly conversation.
    10:55 p.m.: A female customer entered the store and purchased a lighter. She advised that Heeringa was alone in the store and did not appear to be nervous or distressed. The customer did not see anyone in the store or in the parking lot.
    11 p.m.: An Exxon manager and her husband were riding their motorcycles eastbound on Sternberg Road.
    She saw a silver minivan slowly enter the north drive of the Exxon station from the service drive of the Pointes Mall.
    The van drove behind the Exxon station, did a u-turn and extinguished its headlights as it pulled behind the store facing west.
    The manager suspected Heeringa may be in the process of stealing from Exxon, so she turned around on Harvey Street to return to the store.
    The manager and her husband drove to the Pointes Mall, west of the Exxon station, and parked in the lot with a view of the north and west sides of the Exxon station. The minivan was parked on the north side of the Exxon station.
    There were no other vehicles in the lot except for Heeringa's.
    The manager saw a figure standing at the rear of the van and noticed the van’s rear hatch was open. The figure shut the rear hatch and quickly opened it again. It appeared as though the figure was adjusting something in the rear of the van, and then closed the hatch again. She noted that the person's head was just above the roof of the van.
    The person then walked to the driver’s door, got into the van and began driving westbound on the service drive.
    The manager said the store’s rear security light was not on and the store’s rear door did not open at any time. She never saw a struggle or heard anyone yell for help. She did not see Heeringa outside of the store.
    As the van drove closer to their location in the parking lot, the manager and her husband started their motorcycles and pulled up to the service drive. As the van passed, she looked at the driver, a male subject wearing a red or orange sweatshirt. Her husband stated that he did not see the subject well, but did see that he had “crazy” or wavy hair. Neither of them saw Heeringa or anyone else in the van.
    The manager and her husband pulled onto the service drive and followed the van until it stopped at Grand Haven Road. The manager’s husband stated that he was positive the van was a Chrysler Town and Country van, silver in color, as it was the same type a relative owned (Note: This vehicle was located and was in Traverse City at the time of the abduction). He clearly remembered the Town and Country logo on the rear hatch door. Neither obtained the license plate number, as they had no reason to believe a crime had occurred.
    The van turned northbound on Grand Haven Road, while the manager and her husband turned southbound on Grand Haven Road and went home.
    11:02 p.m: Surveillance video from inside of a closed store in the Pointes Mall captured a silver minivan turning northbound onto Grand Haven Road.
    11:03 p.m: Surveillance video from the Homestead Tavern captured a silver minivan driving northbound on Grand Haven Road.
    11:05 p.m: Surveillance video from the Coin Zone captured a silver minivan driving northbound on Grand Haven Road.
    11:10 p.m: A male customer arrived at the gas station, pulled up to the pump and attempted to purchase gasoline. He was unable to do so as the pump would not activate. When the pump did not activate, he entered the store believing that the clerk may have been in the back room and not aware of his presence at the pump. He was unable to locate Heeringa. Upon exiting the store, he spoke with a female customer and called 911.
    11:15 p.m.: Patrol units are dispatched to Exxon, 1196 E Sternberg Road, Norton Shores, regarding a suspicious situation.
    11:25 p.m.: The first officer arrives and begins investigation. Officers searched the store but did not locate Heeringa. Officers located Heeringa's purse and jacket in the back room. The purse contained $420 in cash. Officers noted that nothing inside the store indicated a struggle. There was nothing that appeared to be disturbed. Officers exited the rear door and noted that the door did not have a handle on the outside.
    Officers located items of possible evidence outside the rear door, including what appeared to be a 2-inch by 3-inch blood stain on the concrete, later determined to be Heeringa's. Officers photographed the interior and exterior of the store and evidence items prior to collection. Officers collected a sample of the possible blood stain and packaged the other evidence items.
    11.38 p.m.: Exxon owner was contacted regarding the open store. He in turn contacted the day-shift manager to respond as she lives closer to the store.
    11:50 p.m.: The day-shift manager arrives at the Exxon station and provides officers with her observations of the silver minivan and its driver.
    The manager advised that the cash drawer was “counted down” for the next shift, indicating Heeringa was preparing to close the store. While talking to officers, the manager observed the man claiming to be Heeringa's boyfriend drive past the store in a work vehicle. He was contacted to come to the Exxon station and was questioned by officers.
    12:38 a.m.: A K-9 team requested to search area. A search of the area north and east of the store was conducted with no results.
    So how do they see the van pull behind station and see the lights distinguished and sees the hatch open and close twice but don't see Jessica? Something doesn't add up. We're they moving past the store on their motorcycles and missed the abduction but saw before and after?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    Quote Originally Posted by trenchmouth View Post
    So how do they see the van pull behind station and see the lights distinguished and sees the hatch open and close twice but don't see Jessica? Something doesn't add up. We're they moving past the store on their motorcycles and missed the abduction but saw before and after?
    Give me a few to bring a few more posts over then I have some interesting photos to post. Everyone will really be scratching their heads! I promise!!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    Things that make you scratch your head! Fasteddy's thoughts about the time line & trying to tighten it up. How lucky was the abductor to have picked just the right time to grab her?

    Hope this isn't too confusing. I quoted Fasteddy but I also brought a few of my posts over that were between his

    post #1061

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    What has always struck me about this case is the precise timing in which the abductor committed the crime. If the timeline is to be believed, the van pulled in at exactly the right time when no one was there. And left before another customer showed up at the store. Plus, this wasn't a store in some little sleepy town on a two-lane road. It was a convenience store that sells gas next to a highway and sits on a major 4-lane thoroughfare. I understand there are some statements saying the van was seen in the vicinity in the half hour prior to 11pm that night. But even if a criminal watches a store for a half hour, an hour or an entire day, he can't predict when customers are going to pull in.

    In addition, in a prior century I worked for a convenience store chain as a manager and everything else, when I read Jessica's drawer was counted down and it was nowhere close to closing time--along with the fact she allowed friends to come in the back door!--I'm wondering how she was even working at this store. I mean, those can't be any bigger signs of theft outside of people seeing her carry non-paid-for items out the front door. Maybe the owner felt sorry for her since she was a single mother, etc., and hey, it's his biz not mine, and I'm not trying to be critical of Jessica here but . . .

    Having worked for a convenience store chain for about 10 months, owners and corporations don't take too kindly to workers stealing from them. But I'm reminded of a situation my brother found himself in several years ago. Shoe salesman, a good one. Worked for a couple different shoe companies that were absolutely anal about money, the shoes they ordered, sending defective shoes back, etc. Then he moves the whole way across the country, gets a shoe sales job in the new city, and this business does things the exact opposite--loosey-goosey with everything, money just bleeding out of the business. Well, he eventually figured out the owners weren't in the shoe business . . . they were in "another" business, if you know what I mean. And they eventually got caught, luckily my brother quit before then.

    One more thing about the above: I got to know many store owners in my short time in that career. They took their employees very seriously and every one of them had a story of an employee being assaulted, stuck up, and in a couple cases murdered in their stores . . . and if they had been called about an employee missing, they wouldn't have told the manager to check it out, they would've done it themselves . . . because the owners are ultimately responsible for the health and welfare of their employees, not the manager. Just sayin'. But for the record, I didn't work for the same chain involved in this crime.

    If the timeline is to be believed, and if the manager is to be believed, I'm guessing that Jessica was stuffed into that minivan in those precious minutes between roughly 11pm and 11:10pm. What strikes me odd about that is the manager and her husband were riding motorcycles. Motorcycles are loud and it's not much of a distance between the mall parking lot and the back of the store. And according to the manager, when they pulled their motorcycles into the parking lot the guy at the back of the store was facing them even though he was on the far side of the van. So, he most likely heard the cycles, most likely saw the motorcycles with their headlights on, but the possible perpetrator didn't seem bothered at all. Instead, not only does he drive calmly out of the convenience store parking lot, he drives right by two people sitting on motorcycles in plain sight who could've seen him commit the crime and, at the very least, could get a good description of him. I'll admit: I don't know what to make of that. Was he really that oblivious? Did he know he was seen and drove slowly in an effort to make himself look inconspicuous? I mean, he didn't even freak out when the two motorcycles pulled out and followed him to the mall exit--according to the manager. Interesting . . .
    post #1063

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    One more thing: Would anyone be surprised to know that Sternberg Rd. doesn't have a divider--a car or motorcycle can make a U-turn anywhere on that road at any time. Granted, it would be illegal due to the double yellow line, but physically it's possible. Even so, the manager could've gone to the turn to the north on-ramp on the east side of the highway to make a U-turn, although it would've been a little more dangerous due to there being no stoplight. But it would've been "legal" . . . maybe.

    In any case, Sternberg has a fifth lane in the middle for turning. She and her husband wouldn't have had to have stopped in the passing lane to do the U-turn if done illegally. They could've pulled into that middle lane to do it. I know motorcycle riders have to have their heads on swivels for all the crazy car drivers out there but a seasoned rider could pull this turn off with no problem.

    Instead, she and her husband rode the whole way down to the first light on the east side of the highway--Harvey Rd--to make their U-turn. So, she's near Grand Haven Rd. on Sternberg and she thinks a theft might be going on and she's bothered enough by it that she convinces her husband they should turn around. But, she's not bothered enough to do a U-turn right in the middle of the street on Sternberg so as to catch the thief in the quickest time possible. I mean, the longer she waits to do that U-turn, the less likely she is going to catch somebody, right?

    It's very possible, I guess, that her suspicions didn't kick in until she was well down the road. Like, she was weighing what to do, what to do, what to do, and finally her paranoia took over and by that time she was at Harvey. Wouldn't be unusual. We all think like that--sometimes a realization takes a minute to click in. But that's not how she explained it to police. She stated she suspected a theft when she saw the van parking at the back of the store. She said nothing about debating about turning around or not.

    And I'm still wondering why she didn't just pull straight into the store parking lot--as in pull into the entrance on the far west side of the Exxon parking lot and circle around to the back where she saw the van park? In addition, she could've pulled into the Exxon parking lot and passed by the rear door on her way to the mall parking lot--that's the shortest path to the lot anyway. If she saw something she could've stopped. If she didn't see anyone she could've cruised to the mall lot and waited. Riding the whole way down to the mall entrance seems like the worst possible choice of all choices.

    Once again, hindsight is 20/20. We all do strange things every day that seem to not make sense later. But since I've been a store manager at one time I've been in situations where I suspected employees of stealing and I don't think I would've done what she did in this case.
    Jessica Heeringa: A new twist revealed

    Police said the woman and her husband were riding motorcycles about 11 p.m. on April 26 — about the time Heeringa disappeared.

    The husband told Target 8 they were out on a late-night ride.

    “It was a beautiful night,” he said.

    That was when they spotted a suspicious van in the nearby mini-mall parking lot, he said.

    “We seen this van in the parking lot turn around with its lights off, and then we turned around to check it out to see what was going on,” he told Target 8.

    By the time they turned around, the van was directly behind the gas station, so they drove into the mini-mall parking lot to take a closer look, he said.

    “We see a van sitting there and the hatch pops open, the light comes on, and then the van door closes like something’s caught in it and he lifted it back up and shut it again,” the husband said.

    They never saw Heeringa, never saw a struggle. Then, the van drove past them, which is when his wife got a good look at the driver.

    He said they followed the van in the parking lot to Grand Haven Road, where it turned north.

    “All we had to do was look down at the plate number and neither one of us did,” he said. “We’ve been kicking ourselves in the butt over that.”
    post #1066

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    Jessica Heeringa case: Police release new timeline details, crime-scene photos The part I interpreted:

    "As the van drove closer to their location in the parking lot, the manager and her husband started their motorcycles and pulled up to the service drive. As the van passed, she looked at the driver, a male subject wearing a red or orange sweatshirt. Her husband stated that he did not see the subject well, but did see that he had “crazy” or wavy hair. Neither of them saw Heeringa or anyone else in the van.
    The manager and her husband pulled onto the service drive and followed the van until it stopped at Grand Haven Road. The manager’s husband stated that he was positive the van was a Chrysler Town and Country van, silver in color, as it was the same type a relative owned (Note: This vehicle was located and was in Traverse City at the time of the abduction). He clearly remembered the Town and Country logo on the rear hatch door. Neither obtained the license plate number, as they had no reason to believe a crime had occurred."
    If you check a Google Map, the way I see it in my head is this:

    The motorcycles are in the mall parking to the NW of the Exxon, probably in the southeast section of it. The van travels that skinny road that goes in a WNW direction toward the mall away from the Exxon. The van continues west toward Grand Haven while traveling in the mall parking lot--essentially the furthest part south of it. The motorcyles are parked to the north of the van as it passes. So, when the van passes, the driver's side is on the far side from the manager and her husband, thus making a description difficult.

    So, once the van passes, the motorcycles pull in the same westerly direction and follow the van until it reaches Grand Haven. It stops, presumably, before turning right (north). This is the point at which people go nuts: Why the two didn't get a license plate number. So, the van turns north, the motorcycles turn south on Grand Haven and go to the intersection of Sternberg and Grand Haven, and I presume go east on Sternberg to continue their trip to wherever they were headed that night.

    What makes the news article a little tough to understand is the service road actually becomes part of the mall parking lot. So, when it says the motorcycles pull onto the service road, really all the motorcycles were doing was making a turn west in the parking lot. If you Google the map you'll see what I mean.

    I should say, imamaze, that the mall has multiple exits. I'm taking for granted the manager means the first one north of Sternberg on Grand Haven.
    post #1072

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    After thinking about it a little bit more, it occurs to me you could even tighten the sighting time up to 10:57pm. So, the mgr sees the van at 10:57pm, drives down to Harvey, comes back, and parks at the mall at 11pm. That leaves a minute to observe the guy standing behind the van before he gets in and leaves at 11:01pm.

    The problem with that scenario is still the lighter girl. At 10:57pm she would've been at least exiting the store and at the very quickest pulling away from her parking place. But to my knowledge she didn't mention a van pulling into the back of the store as she left.

    I should say . . . we need to remember that ingress and egress of that Exxon is unusually complicated. If you look at the Google map, you'll see what I mean. There's no short entrance like we're all accustomed to for gas stations. Instead, a customer, if traveling west, has to go past the Exxon, make a right onto the road on its western boundary, travel about 100 ft. and then make a 180 degree turn to get to the parking lot.

    What this means is for the lighter girl to leave, her headlights would've been pointed in the direction of the access road and the mall as she made the 180 degree turn to get back to Sternberg. And to our knowledge, she saw no other vehicles as she exited. So, either the van still had yet to make its move toward the Exxon OR the van was already there. My bet is the van was already there with its lights out. Without the security light on in the back of the Exxon there's almost no chance the lighter girl would've seen it.

    In addition, if the girl went in at 10:55pm and left the store at say 10:56 and 30 secs. She gets to her car. Probably lights a cigarette--hey, it's the reason she probably stopped in the first place. So, at the earliest she could leave the parking lot was 10:57 and 30 seconds.

    Now, it's important to keep in mind that it takes the mgr 3 minutes to go down to Harvey and back. So, the latest the mgr could've seen the van pulling into the Exxon parking lot is 10:57pm. It can't be 10:58 because she wouldn't get back in time to see the van driver outside his car.

    Now, it could be the mgr saw the van at 10:56pm or 10:55pm.

    But this all still doesn't explain how the manager saw the van pull in but not the lighter girl's car in the parking lot. Because if the lighter girl's car was truly gone--meaning the time was at least 10:58pm, then the window in which the mgr could see the van, drive the whole down to Harvey and back, and get to the mall parking lot before the van left would've closed. It would be 11:01pm by that time and the van at the very least would've been pulling out of the parking lot, negating the mgr's testimony that she saw the van driver outside his vehicle before he left.

    Wow, I hope I'm explaining this clearly.
    post #1075

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    There's something else that strikes me about the timeline.

    "She saw a silver minivan slowly enter the north drive of the Exxon station from the service drive of the Pointes Mall.
    The van drove behind the Exxon station, did a u-turn and extinguished its headlights as it pulled behind the store facing west."

    What this means to me is the manager first saw the van when it was at the 90 degree bend in the service road to the NW of the Exxon. That's how I interpret it, somebody else may see it differently. From that point to the back of the Exxon--including a U-turn by the van--I'm saying is about 200ft. And if the van is traveling at about 15mph, that's 22ft/sec. roughly. So it took the van roughly 10 seconds (200/22) to complete the portion the mgr saw. In fact, given the turns it probably took longer than that--but 10 seconds works for the purposes of this presentation.

    Now, if you go on Google Maps and do street view, you can figure out the furthest most eastern point on Sternberg the mgr could be and see the van stop and puts its headlights out behind the building. It's a line of sight thing--for example: the mgr couldn't have seen the van turn its lights outs in the back if she was at the gas pumps in the front. My estimation is the furtherst point east the manager could be on Sternberg to see the van shut off its lights is at the first mall entrance to the west of the Exxon entrance/exit. It's 400ft. from that first mall entrance to the Exxon entrance/exit, by the way.

    So, by using the above facts, we can extrapolate and figure out at what point the mgr would've first seen the van on the service road. How? Well, keep in mind this is a "worst case" scenario . . . this is the latest everything could've happened.

    Well, the mgr is on Sternberg on her motorcycle. Let's say she is traveling 45mph--the speed limit. That's 66 ft/sec. So in the time the van travels that 200ft., the motorcycle travels 600!!! ft. Well, going west from the first mall entrance (the latest point at which the mgr could see the van put out its lights) 600ft. is 200ft. past the Grand Haven/Sternberg intersection. Meaning, in this scenario, the van first caught the mgr's eye when she was 200ft. to the west of the Grand Haven/Sternberg intersection. You may be asking how far is it from that point to the 90 degree elbow in the service road? That's 1000ft. At night. With cars probably coming the opposite direction, I doubt that's possible.

    Granted, maybe she was stopped at the GH/Sternberg intersection or she was traveling much slower than 45mph, thus putting her closer to the Exxon upon the initial view of the van. But then we're back where we started: If she was stopped or traveling slow when the van pulled in, did a U-turn, and put out its lights, why didn't the mgr turn into the Exxon right then? Even in my scenario with her traveling 45mph and seeing the van turn out its lights as she passes the first mall entrance, she would've had plenty of time to slow down, pull into the middle turn lane, and turn into the Exxon since there's no barrier there--it's 400ft. from the first mall entrance to the Exxon entrance/exit. If she's going 45mph, that's a 9 sec. span. Plenty of time to make a decision.

    By the way, the slower the van is traveling in any example, the harder it gets to square the mgr's observations that night.

    For the record, I'm not accusing the manager of anything. All I'm saying is her recollection of that night is not true. And the police should've done a study like I've done before ever releasing that timeline. They would've found what I discovered as well.
    I've never heard it's illegal to make a left over double lines

    From google link - it is legal to cross those lines to turn left to enter an alley, a driveway, or a shopping center unless there is a local ordinance against it.

    post #1085

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    The last couple posts are exactly why there's the possibilities of several different reasons that Jessica was taken away. Drugs, money, rape, did she know something she shouldn't, etc. When drug dealings are so close to a person who disappeared the irrationality of the disappearance goes through the roof. And the possible perpetrators goes up as well.

    I know I've been typing A LOT on this thread lately but I want to run something by everyone by first asking a question:

    How do you think Jessica's abduction happened? The reason I ask is because when I start thinking about it's a little harder to imagine than you think.

    Remember, it happened fast. Very fast. As I've said before: The whole thing occurred in under two minutes--somewhere between 10:58pm and 11pm. (No, I'm not getting into the timeline again for now)

    Remember, the only blood found was outside, none in the store. That tells me a couple things:

    1. The abduction happened outside of the store.

    2. The back of the van was VERY close to that rear door.

    So, how did the guy know Jennifer was going to go out the back door right when he pulled in? Or, did he know her, opened that back door to get her attention, she walks back there, and as soon as she gets outside, he attacks her, and throws her in the van?

    I guess what I'm saying is the chance that the abductor was a stranger is almost none. I think that's just a little too coincidental that the guy would show up just as she goes outside in the back--with the caveat that if she had some very, very, very steady pattern of going outside at 11pm, then it would be possible a stranger, with enough prior observation, could predict that. But this is a convenience store, not an assembly line. Things in a store are unpredictable--who knows when customers will show up, who knows who might hang out in the store, etc. And I think it's enough of a variable to totally discount a stranger taking a chance on it. I mean, how "fortunate" did the guy get that she goes outside as soon as he pulls up? It's just about unimaginable.

    Put another way: If the stranger pulls up to the back in the van, and she doesn't come out, what's he gonna do? Wait all night? Remember: He's in the back and might no be able to tell if anyone's in the parking lot or not. So he wouldn't be able to take the chance to sneak into get her.

    So, to me, according to the facts of this case--with a high degree of probability--I can safely say that Jessica was lured to that back door. And the only person I can see doing that is someone she knows. I mean, wouldn't she be freaked out if somebody she didn't know opened the back door and asked her to come out back? I know she was friendly but was she that friendly?

    I'm struck by something else. Why abduct her while the store is still open? Whoever did this had to know that another customer would come to the store eventually--as one did at 11:10pm--and the customer might call 911, like the customer did when he found no clerk at the Exxon. That would greatly narrow the perpetrators chances of getting away. Actually, the van guy got lucky it took until 11:10pm for someone to pull in. That gave him 9 minutes to get away, plus the time it took the cops to respond. What if a customer pulls in at 11:02pm--it could've happened, right?

    So, risky. A questionable choice, at least on the surface.

    Isn't the better play to wait until the Exxon closes? Jessica shuts the place down--closing time is always the same, easy to predict. If the store's closed, no customers. Later at night, less cars on the road. Furthermore, there's gonna be a lot more leeway on what time 911 is called. So, way more time for the van guy to get away. In fact, when cops show up at the Exxon and see Jessica's car, they might think a friend picked her up and they went out. Maybe nobody would've even known Jessica was gone until the next morning when her car is still there when the morning shift shows up.

    The choice of 11pm while the store is open is a perplexing one, unless that was the only time the bad guy could do it . . . Maybe it was the only time he had access to the van, for instance.

    Do you now see why Jessica's abduction isn't as straight forward as we all think?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    507
    Lot to digest Roselvr, very interesting analysis. Was a reinactment or simulation every done to visually see the reported timeline of events ?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    6,091
    Rubyred post 1109
    Quote Originally Posted by Rubyred View Post
    It was a worker that called 911 after finishing his shift at 11pm, and finding no one there. Video at link is worth watching again.

    Harpster said he stopped at the gas station after getting off work about 11 p.m. When he walked inside, no one was there

    Police: Jessica Heeringa likely knew abductor

    The 911 call and what he observes in the parking lot.

    911 Call Released In Connection With Norton Shores Abduction
    post #1130

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    The way I understand the Honda SUV and relate it to the timeline is the female customer in the timeline is the driver of the Honda SUV. We have to remember he didn't make the call until he came back out of the store. It's very possible the only car in the parking lot was Jessica's when he pulled in and then went inside. And then when he came out the Honda was there. Thus, when asked if there were any other cars in the parking lot, he says Jessica's and the Honda, not maybe realizing the 911 dispatcher meant "cars in the parking lot when he pulled in, not when he came out of the store".

    It's important to remember that since that 911 call, the police have attempted to iron some of those facts out. Granted, you all know my attitude toward a small part of the timeline. But I suppose I could be relating the timeline to that 911 call in the wrong way.

    The 911 call does bring to the forefront another fact: Not only had Jessica closed out her drawer at least a half hour early but she shut off the gas pumps as well. This was the very reason the 911 caller went inside--because he couldn't pump gas. And remember: He was eventually identified as a person who stopped at that Exxon a couple times a week. And it sounds like he was surprised the pumps weren't on.

    I pretty much don't understand why she counted her drawer early--but it smells like theft to me.

    But what was she doing with the gas pumps? I understand some stations do that because they're afraid of people gassing up and driving off with not paying. So, if a person wants gas and wants to pay with cash, the person must give the money to the cashier first, then the cashier turns the pump on.

    However, my impression is the 911 caller was trying to use a credit card. Why? Because he said he tried to pump the gas and it wouldn't work. Well, if he's a regular customer and pays cash for gas, he should already know he needs to go inside and give his money to Jessica before the pump will work. So, there's no reason to try to pump the gas before he does that.

    But he did try to pump gas before going inside. So, I'm left believing he was trying to use his credit card and the pump wouldn't turn on.

    Why were the pumps turned off? It almost seems like Jessica was trying to drive customers away, i.e. no cash for change, pumps not working.

    Overall, given the cash drawer and the pumps, it gives me the impression of one of two things: 1. She was trying to get out of work earlier than 11:30pm, and she was trying to do that by making the store seem as closed as possible. OR 2. She thought somebody was coming by and she didn't want to allow her work to get in the way of the meeting, so she was trying to make it impossible for customers to do business.

    Does anybody have any insight to this? Especially the gas pump issue.
    post #1131

    Quote Originally Posted by fasteddy8170 View Post
    One more thing . . .

    Since the 911 caller was a regular at the Exxon it's safe to assume he got gas there at about the same time--generally after work, a little after 11pm. And from the 911 call I'm left with the idea he was surprised the pumps weren't on. Meaning: He was used to them being on when he stopped at that Exxon at that time of night.

    However, they weren't on a little after 11pm when he stopped the night Jessica disappeared. Coincidence? Something? Nothing?

    I'd like to know if the 911 caller ever experienced the pumps being off before and had to go inside to get the clerk--possibly Jessica--to turn them on. Were the pumps being off a little after 11pm a common occurrence? Or was it standard practice? Given that he stopped at the Exxon that night and professed to being a regular customer tells me he was happy with the service there. Thus, the pumps were usually on when he stopped at that time of night.

    Maybe somebody else has a different impression.

Page 1 of 64 1 2 3 11 51 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #8
    By imamaze in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1189
    Last Post: 09-16-2014, 01:43 AM
  2. MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #6
    By imamaze in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1029
    Last Post: 07-09-2013, 10:02 PM
  3. MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #5
    By imamaze in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1064
    Last Post: 05-25-2013, 11:03 PM
  4. MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #4
    By imamaze in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1067
    Last Post: 05-08-2013, 08:50 PM
  5. MI MI - Jessica Heeringa, 25, Norton Shores, 26 April 2013 - #3
    By imamaze in forum 2010's Missing
    Replies: 1100
    Last Post: 05-04-2013, 10:41 AM

Tags for this Thread