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

[fasteddy8170]

Thank you for doing that, Roselvr.

 

[colette]

Jessica's boyfriend Dakota has pled guilty to 3 felony drug charges:

Dakotah Quail-Dyer pleaded guilty Friday to one count of possession of a controlled substance and two counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, all as a second-time habitual offender, according to Muskegon County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Tim Maat.

http://woodtv.com/2014/07/29/heeringas-boyfriend-pleads-to-drug-charges/

He will be sentenced in Sept. Things may change in the custody of Jessica's and Dakota's son.....

 

[Treelights]

Jessica's boyfriend Dakota has pled guilty to 3 felony drug charges:

Dakotah Quail-Dyer pleaded guilty Friday to one count of possession of a controlled substance and two counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, all as a second-time habitual offender, according to Muskegon County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Tim Maat.

http://woodtv.com/2014/07/29/heeringas-boyfriend-pleads-to-drug-charges/

He will be sentenced in Sept. Things may change in the custody of Jessica's and Dakota's son.....

Second time Habitual offender...
That doesn't look good at all...
IMOO.

 

[Roselvr]

Looking back over my notes; pretty sure the coworker was more specific with saying the Meijers lot which has many entrances as well as "guitar store". While the police did not identify her by name, she did post publicly that she was the witness that saw him... yet she still worked there

Jessica's boyfriend Dakota has pled guilty to 3 felony drug charges:

Dakotah Quail-Dyer pleaded guilty Friday to one count of possession of a controlled substance and two counts of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, all as a second-time habitual offender, according to Muskegon County Chief Assistant Prosecutor Tim Maat.

http://woodtv.com/2014/07/29/heeringas-boyfriend-pleads-to-drug-charges/

He will be sentenced in Sept. Things may change in the custody of Jessica's and Dakota's son.....

I have to wonder when the 1st time was & if it's why Jessica was taken.

Does anyone remember if this is true? I don't remember it.

Quail-Dyer has been fighting to keep custody of his son Zevyn. In court records, he said he has kept his son from Heeringa’s family, in part, because they have falsely accused him of abuse and neglect and threatened to take the boy away.

 

[fasteddy8170]

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?

 

[colette]

Maybe he somehow enticed her by saying he had some really good weed and he would stop by at the end of her shift to give her a sample.

 

[Montjoy]

Maybe he somehow enticed her by saying he had some really good weed and he would stop by at the end of her shift to give her a sample.

Please, no disrespect, but weed and its varying qualities -- it's just not like that. I've never heard of 'really good weed' as being a motive for a violent crime.

 

[colette]

Please, no disrespect, but weed and its varying qualities -- it's just not like that. I've never heard of 'really good weed' as being a motive for a violent crime.

I am saying the guy could have used a ruse saying he had some really good weed and he would stop by at the end of her shift. Maybe using a ruse of this sort so she would open the back door and go near his van. Then instead of sharing his supposed weed ( or whatever) he kidnaps her. I am not saying the weed was the cause of the crime at all. I am saying something like weed could have been used as a ruse.

 

[psyquestor]

Maybe he somehow enticed her by saying he had some really good weed and he would stop by at the end of her shift to give her a sample.

Or simply that he needed to put air in his tires. (Our local station has the air pump situated in the back and the attendant must turn it on). We can't be sure how or if she was lured there. Hypothesizing that drugs had something to do with it maligns Jessica.

Respect the absent imo.

 

[fasteddy8170]

Absolutely possible that a stranger could've pulled up to the back and enticed her somehow. And that's not to diminish Jessica's mental capacity--Ted Bundy enticed women by pretending to be injured, and it worked very well for him.

But enticing would infer he opened the back door to get her attention. How would he know Jennifer keeps it cracked open so someone can open it from the outside despite it having no handle? Did he notice that another time he was in the store? Then, he's not exactly a stranger then, is he? What if Jessica doesn't fall for his ruse--then he's shown his face to her and maybe she'll call 911?

Maybe there's something else to this as well. If it was a stranger who took Jessica, then I have to guess that rape was the motive. Sure, there could be others but I think that's the one that first comes to everyone's brains. The problem with that is he obviously didn't rape her before he took her because the abduction occurred in about two minutes. So, his plan, I guess, was to do it somewhere else--maybe in the van out in the woods, somewhere--who knows.

But remember: Jessica was already bleeding before she went into the van. The blood drop was 2 inches by 3 inches. That's not a small splotch. For example, we've all cut our fingers with a knife. It seems like blood is everywhere but the droplets end up being very small--like tenths of inches in diameter.

Jessica's blood drop was several times that size. So, she's seriously bleeding, probably from her head. Meaning, there's gonna be blood all over him. And the van. And then the stranger still rapes her? I guess it's possible. I suppose there are stranger occurrences and rapes than that. Maybe the stranger's attack went totally sideways and he needed to really injure her--very possible.

But being that Jessica was bleeding so profusely--and yes I think you can determine that from the one big drop--this doesn't feel like a "rape motive" attack at all. It feels more like an attack, period--without any of the other stuff afterwards. Another thing to remember: Yes, many rape victims end up being murdered and the crime scenes are messy. But the blood spilled usually comes after the rape, not before.

So, if it was an assault just for assault's sake, this also leads me more to a person who knew her--some kind of attack due to hate and/or revenge. It could be the reason the guy didn't wait till the store closed--he couldn't hold his anger in anymore and descended on the store when he felt like it.

Maybe it's nothing. Maybe it's something.

 

[Roselvr]

Please, no disrespect, but weed and its varying qualities -- it's just not like that. I've never heard of 'really good weed' as being a motive for a violent crime.

We do not know if it was violent. Jessica being taken makes no sense what so ever; especially reading what fasteddy points out. I do believe someone went and took photos of where the co-worker supposedly was.
We do not know if she smoked; we know he does. Perhaps she was making his pickup for some reason. What makes no sense to me is I would think most would have it handy; not in the back of a van. The fact that he opened the back of the van & left quickly goes more along the lines of the co-worker suspecting J was stealing. Leave stuff in the back of the store with the light out; someone pulls up quickly throws it in then leaves... But why take her?

I have not been able to make sense of anything using pot or stealing. There is something missing. We're not going to solve this to bring her back to her family. Hopefully her family will find the missing link.

Could have sworn that I read the amount of blood was very small

 

[RubyRed]

Some things I noticed from this news article:

“The officers that went in initially found no signs of any struggle. There’s nothing tipped over, the back door was locked and latched” said Norton Shores Police Chief Daniel Shaw.

Does this mean the perp locked and latched the door from inside and left by the front door? How else would you latch it?



Officers also found a garbage can by the back door, as if Jessica had been getting ready to take the trash out as she closed the store

A regular routine that someone knew?


“I do think that she was taken by somebody that she knew said Shaw

I think this also.


We need to know whether or not that van was actually involved, or just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time,” said Chief Shaw.

Kind of like the witness was in the right place at the right time? I'm thinking there is a good possibility this is a red herring.


They’ve narrowed it down to about four potential suspects – people either connected to Jessica’s past or customers at the store.

Someone that knew there were no cameras. Two or maybe a third were involved , one or two was on the lookout while the other did it. The window of opportunity was very small.


http://www.wxyz.com/news/one-year-l...mom-jessica-heeringa-missing-from-gas-station

 

[RubyRed]

We do not know if it was violent. Jessica being taken makes no sense what so ever; especially reading what fasteddy points out. I do believe someone went and took photos of where the co-worker supposedly was.
We do not know if she smoked; we know he does. Perhaps she was making his pickup for some reason. What makes no sense to me is I would think most would have it handy; not in the back of a van. The fact that he opened the back of the van & left quickly goes more along the lines of the co-worker suspecting J was stealing. Leave stuff in the back of the store with the light out; someone pulls up quickly throws it in then leaves... But why take her?

I have not been able to make sense of anything using pot or stealing. There is something missing. We're not going to solve this to bring her back to her family. Hopefully her family will find the missing link.

Could have sworn that I read the amount of blood was very small

bbm


Shaw said the droplet confirmed that Heeringa was abducted.

"She was obviously taken against her will and put up some sort of struggle,” Shaw said. “She was somehow injured. How severely, we don't know. We hope it's a minor injury.

Also some good pictures at this link of all angles of the gas station.

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2013/05/jessica_heeringas_blood_identi.html

Just found this, So a big difference between a droplet and 2″ x 3″ blood stain

.•Officers located items of possible evidence outside the rear door, including what appeared to be a 2″ x 3″ blood stain on the concrete. (The blood was later determined by DNA analysis to be from JESSICA.)

http://fox17online.com/2014/04/24/f...ga-case-file-and-crime-scene-photos-unveiled/

 

[Roselvr]

Some things I noticed from this news article:

“The officers that went in initially found no signs of any struggle. There’s nothing tipped over, the back door was locked and latched” said Norton Shores Police Chief Daniel Shaw.

Does this mean the perp locked and latched the door from inside and left by the front door? How else would you latch it?



Officers also found a garbage can by the back door, as if Jessica had been getting ready to take the trash out as she closed the store

A regular routine that someone knew?


“I do think that she was taken by somebody that she knew said Shaw

I think this also.


We need to know whether or not that van was actually involved, or just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time,” said Chief Shaw.

Kind of like the witness was in the right place at the right time? I'm thinking there is a good possibility this is a red herring.


They’ve narrowed it down to about four potential suspects – people either connected to Jessica’s past or customers at the store.

Someone that knew there were no cameras. Two or maybe a third were involved , one or two was on the lookout while the other did it. The window of opportunity was very small.

http://www.wxyz.com/news/one-year-la...om-gas-station

Your link is not working for some reason
ONE YEAR LATER: Cops release details after W. Mich mom Jessica Heeringa taken from gas station

I've also wondered if the sketch/van were a red herring. If the "person" stopping in the back got out; opened/closed the back then drove off; there had to be a 2nd person holding her down if the co-worker did not see Jess in the back unless she was knocked out. Then add to it that the back door was locked and latched. Was Jess back there already & why? No doubt a lot of people/customers knew her routine. The guy that called 911 could tell she was closing.
I totally agree there's a huge difference between a droplet & a 2x3 blood stain!

 

[cebee]

I am in the group who believes the report of the van ( and detailed description of the abductor..) are bogus. Maybe because the witness is trying to protect someone, maybe because she just wanted to make herself important at the time and never thought it would go this far... regardless. I dont believe in the silver van. SO... If we dont believe there was a silver van seen by the witness... what other scenarios are possible? The picture of the back door shows a trash can RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT... if she were dragged out, the trash can would surely be pushed aside.
To me this leaves her going out back of her own will.
WHY?

I agree with Fasteddy- Why she was taken during work hours is puzzling. SO much easier to wait till she left at the end of the shift. Much less likely to be seen. So did something go down when she walked out back- not planned? Is there a reason why it had to be while the store was still open? ( something in the back room he wanted?)

Since I also believe the witness' story is bogus... how would that change our time line? If we leave out the whole witness 'driving by and saw the lights out and turned around" scenario- it we JUST look at the time between when the last known customer ( the Bic lighter lady) was in there... and when the store was discovered to be empty- how long are we looking at? The only times we KNOW are the bic lighter sale.. and the 911 call when the store was empty... everything else is just ... hearsay? Even if the witness did see what she thought she did.. unless she looked at the time, she could be off by quite a bit...

Thoughts?

 

[DocBrew]

I feel if the police felt the tip about the van was bogus, they never would've released still footage of it. The van is involved, IMO.

 

[Roselvr]

I am in the group who believes the report of the van ( and detailed description of the abductor..) are bogus. Maybe because the witness is trying to protect someone, maybe because she just wanted to make herself important at the time and never thought it would go this far... regardless. I dont believe in the silver van. SO... If we dont believe there was a silver van seen by the witness... what other scenarios are possible? The picture of the back door shows a trash can RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT... if she were dragged out, the trash can would surely be pushed aside.
To me this leaves her going out back of her own will.
WHY?

I agree with Fasteddy- Why she was taken during work hours is puzzling. SO much easier to wait till she left at the end of the shift. Much less likely to be seen. So did something go down when she walked out back- not planned? Is there a reason why it had to be while the store was still open? ( something in the back room he wanted?)

Since I also believe the witness' story is bogus... how would that change our time line? If we leave out the whole witness 'driving by and saw the lights out and turned around" scenario- it we JUST look at the time between when the last known customer ( the Bic lighter lady) was in there... and when the store was discovered to be empty- how long are we looking at? The only times we KNOW are the bic lighter sale.. and the 911 call when the store was empty... everything else is just ... hearsay? Even if the witness did see what she thought she did.. unless she looked at the time, she could be off by quite a bit...

Thoughts?

Keep in mind the back door was locked and latched
The van may or may not be involved; perhaps they saw it go by & knew it would be on video?

 

[Flutterby80]

I'm local and it's legal to cross double lines to turn into a parking lot, but U-turns are generally a no no. Especially on the stretch of Sternberg between Old Grand Haven Rd and Harvey St, because there is a northbound and a southbound exit onto US31 there. A U-turn there would be highly dangerous.

BTW, I took pictures of the gas station from different parking lot locations early on. I think 2nd thread, but not sure. Maybe they are in the timeline??

 

[Flutterby80]

I was thinking about this last night. I'm not sure what they mean by locked and latched. There was no outside handle, so I think the door probably latched automatically when it closed. That would be why Jessica propped it open to smoke...so it didn't close and lock her out.

I worked at a thrift store years ago and we had a door like that. The drain where we had to dump our mop water at night was just outside that door. We always propped it open with a paint can so we didn't get locked out. If it closed, you couldn't open it from the outside. It had no handle, but it also locked until someone pushed on the handle/bar and opened it from the inside.

 

[Roselvr]

I was thinking about this last night. I'm not sure what they mean by locked and latched. There was no outside handle, so I think the door probably latched automatically when it closed. That would be why Jessica propped it open to smoke...so it didn't close and lock her out.

I worked at a thrift store years ago and we had a door like that. The drain where we had to dump our mop water at night was just outside that door. We always propped it open with a paint can so we didn't get locked out. If it closed, you couldn't open it from the outside. It had no handle, but it also locked until someone pushed on the handle/bar and opened it from the inside.

Appears to be the type that locks when it closes.