FL - Jennifer Kesse, 24, Orlando, 24 Jan 2006 - #12

[Ozoner]

JMO.

I don't think this case will be solved, nor Jennifer found, until EVERY bit of information is disclosed and examined without bias, until LE fully answers her family's questions, and until her family fully and unambiguously answers the questions put to them. For example: Why is it a secret (to us, anyway) when the call to Jennifer's boyfriend began and ended? Why is that information such as that kept from the general public? (I do understand that LE should maintain the integrity of an investigation, but after twelve years, maybe it's time to try something different.)

Start the investigation over, without ANY preconceived ideas about anyone remotely involved, including Jennifer. What does the evidence say? Let the story tell itself. Why anyone feels the need at this point to "protect" Jennifer from whatever the evidence might say is simply beyond my scope of understanding. And I don't think Jennifer was cheating on her boyfriend--but so what if she was? The only reason it would matter is if it had a direct bearing on her disappearance.

I should probably stop there. But I don't understand the reluctance to share any and all information, especially twelve years later! EVERYONE in Jennifer's life should be reexamined, even if the Kesses think someone they know just could not have harmed Jennifer.

Because someone did harm her, and it could be anyone.

In my mind, this was a night time abduction--the phones being disabled between 10:20 and 10:40 the night before Jennifer was reported missing pretty clearly show that. Especially if Jennifer ALWAYS used her phone as an alarm clock, as has been stated. Something happened that night to prevent her using her phone for an alarm, since her phone was shut down.

It has also been stated that Jennifer ALWAYS took showers before work in the morning, so she must have been abducted getting ready for work on that Tuesday morning, since the shower was damp when the family got into her apartment that afternoon.

Why is one ALWAYS (the shower) believed to be true, and not the other (the phones)? Especially if the phone pings information from that Monday night is correct. Common sense should lead us to believe whatever happened, happened that Monday night after she talked to her boyfriend.

Comments about the apartment, and how maybe things weren't how Jennifer usually had them. Well, she had just returned from a trip. Her makeup could have been out and not in its usual spot because she was unpacking and setting things out to put away later. Same for the blow dryer, and other items that seemed to be in places they were not usually kept. She obviously had not finished unpacking completely if there were still items in her bag.

Someone upthread (sorry, cannot remember who) said s\he thought someone Jennifer knew (friend, coworker, etc.) came to her door, with a reasonable request or problem that s\he needed Jennifer's help with. Jennifer probably wouldn't have felt the need to do a "safe call" because she was with someone she knew. I tend to agree with this.

Start investigating with a clean slate, no preconceived ideas about what someone certainly would or would not do, and as I said before, let the evidence tell the story. Because I think it will if given the chance without the chains of supposition holding it back.

As does any missing person and the families impacted so terribly by the unknown, Jennifer deserves to be found, and her family deserve answers and justice.

I agree with you. Family members' comments about what Jennifer would or wouldn't do are not evidence and should be ignored. The family members weren't living with Jennifer in her apartment; they don't really know what she might have done or might not have done; they're speculating. Sticking to the actual evidence will solve the case.

 

[shelly111]

thank you
i thought jennifer being a safe person would have a chain lock or a swing door guard
you installed from inside. These locks prevent the door to open all the wsy in case someone wants to get in.
If this is the case and the abductor had keys to jennifer's apt , it would be very easy for him to come at night and open the door

 

[rd_jfc]

thank you
i thought jennifer being a safe person would have a chain lock or a swing door guard
you installed from inside. These locks prevent the door to open all the wsy in case someone wants to get in.
If this is the case and the abductor had keys to jennifer's apt , it would be very easy for him to come at night and open the door

A deadbolt without a key, like I have on my apartment door in Florida and I would expect on most apartment and condo doors of three stories or less in Florida, is what I expect Jennifer had on her condo door.

I'm pretty sure Jennifer and everyone else would not accept having their locks able to be opened with keys. It would be unacceptable for Jennifer since common practice for typical apartments / condos is they are installed.

However, I do not know the practices of taller buildings. I lived one year on 47th floor in Chicago. I can't remember what locks I had there. But I would expect deadbolts (without a key deadbolts) are not installed where management could not easily get to the windows. Because that's what you have to do if someone is incapacitated or dies locked in with a deadbolt because you have to break the door frame to get in. That might be unacceptable in a highrise, I don't know.

But Jennifer lived in a typical apartment / condo building for Florida and deadbolts (without keys) are typically installed. I
don't personally know what Jennifer's door looked like, though.

 

[windrower]

I apologize for the double post above. My electronics are planning a mutiny, apparently.

 

[liz b.]

JMO.

I don't think this case will be solved, nor Jennifer found, until EVERY bit of information is disclosed and examined without bias, until LE fully answers her family's questions, and until her family fully and unambiguously answers the questions put to them. For example: Why is it a secret (to us, anyway) when the call to Jennifer's boyfriend began and ended? Why is information such as that kept from the general public? (I do understand that LE should maintain the integrity of an investigation, but after twelve years, maybe it's time to try something different.)

Start the investigation over, without ANY preconceived ideas about anyone remotely involved, including Jennifer. What does the evidence say? Let the story tell itself. Why anyone feels the need at this point to "protect" Jennifer from whatever the evidence might say is simply beyond my scope of understanding. And I don't think Jennifer was cheating on her boyfriend--but so what if she was? The only reason it would matter is if it had a direct bearing on her disappearance.

I should probably stop there. But I don't understand the reluctance to share any and all information, especially twelve years later! EVERYONE in Jennifer's life should be reexamined, even if the Kesses think someone they know just could not have harmed Jennifer.

Because someone did harm her, and it could be anyone.

In my mind, this was a night time abduction--the phones being disabled between 10:20 and 10:40 the night before Jennifer was reported missing pretty clearly show that. Especially if Jennifer ALWAYS used her phone as an alarm clock, as has been stated. Something happened that night to prevent her using her phone for an alarm, since her phone was shut down.

It has also been stated that Jennifer ALWAYS took showers before work in the morning, so she must have been abducted getting ready for work on that Tuesday morning, since the shower was damp when the family got into her apartment that afternoon.

Why is one ALWAYS (the shower) believed to be true, and not the other (the phones)? Especially if the phone pings information from that Monday night is correct. Common sense should lead us to believe whatever happened, happened that Monday night after she talked to her boyfriend.

Comments about the apartment, and how maybe things weren't how Jennifer usually had them. Well, she had just returned from a trip. Her makeup could have been out and not in its usual spot because she was unpacking and setting things out to put away later. Same for the blow dryer, and other items that seemed to be in places they were not usually kept. She obviously had not finished unpacking completely if there were still items in her bag.

Someone upthread (sorry, cannot remember who) said s\he thought someone Jennifer knew (friend, coworker, etc.) came to her door, with a reasonable request or problem that s\he needed Jennifer's help with. Jennifer probably wouldn't have felt the need to do a "safe call" because she was with someone she knew. I tend to agree with this.

Start investigating with a clean slate, no preconceived ideas about what someone certainly would or would not do, and as I said before, let the evidence tell the story. Because I think it will if given the chance without the chains of supposition holding it back.

As does any missing person and the families impacted so terribly by the unknown, Jennifer deserves to be found, and her family deserve answers and justice.

Some things I wish had happened :
That LE had released the video of their POI sooner. Yes, he was partly hidden, but still someone's memory might have been jogged.

That the car was still with LE. I truly do not understand why LE didn't keep it.

That the condo had been processed as a crime scene.

That LE had not immediately treated this case as a probable "she took off " case.

That her work colleagues and the workers at her condo had been interviewed very early on.

Yes, by all means go where the evidence leads. But when much of the (sparse) evidence is let go, where exactly is there to go to ? JMO

 

[Ozoner]

A deadbolt without a key, like I have on my apartment door in Florida and I would expect on most apartment and condo doors of three stories or less in Florida, is what I expect Jennifer had on her condo door.

I'm pretty sure Jennifer and everyone else would not accept having their locks able to be opened with keys. It would be unacceptable for Jennifer since common practice for typical apartments / condos is they are installed.

However, I do not know the practices of taller buildings. I lived one year on 47th floor in Chicago. I can't remember what locks I had there. But I would expect deadbolts (without a key deadbolts) are not installed where management could not easily get to the windows. Because that's what you have to do if someone is incapacitated or dies locked in with a deadbolt because you have to break the door frame to get in. That might be unacceptable in a highrise, I don't know.

But Jennifer lived in a typical apartment / condo building for Florida and deadbolts (without keys) are typically installed. I
don't personally know what Jennifer's door looked like, though.

Why assume anything? Let's try to find out for certain.

I lived in a few different condos or apartments when I was younger, and every one of them had a keyed deadbolt. I've never even seen the type of lock you're talking about; they're certainly not common here in Michigan.

 

[Truth Prevails]

I don't know, but typically there are two, one with a key and one that's closed or opened from inside by turning the lock. If there's no chain lock then typically there is the hand turned inside deadbolt. But I don't know what specifically Jennifer had, just what Truth posted from her research.

thanks

Truth posted she was able to determine that Jennifer had a deadbolt, not the chain lock.

BBM - Yikes. I was mostly interested in confirming if Jennifer had sliding glass doors--and she did not. But mostly that's what I was focused on. (The door leading to the balcony).

After reading your comment a page or so back on all the different types of deadbolts, I'm a bit flabbergasted. I had no idea.

Just going from memory--and I'll be the first to admit, my memory can disappoint me these days--however, I remember Mr. Kesse mentioning that he had installed a deadbolt for Jenn that had the knob you would turn from the inside. My understanding was that there was no key to it, and its purpose was solely to keep her safe once she was inside. Also, and very important here, I believe he meant, without confirming, that he installed it on her condo door leading to the open air hallway. (Not the balcony).

Now, of course, like everything other tiny detail of this case--no matter how insignificant--there is also the following information that could be conflicting.

Mr Kesse has also said that he had new locks for Jenn's condo doors but she didn't want them installed until the "bucket list" was completed. And so, he waited at her request, but now heavily regrets his decision.

So, I'm not sure if both are true, or exactly how that worked.

Another thing Mr. Kesse mentioned was that he told Jennifer about putting a chair under her doorknob at night, and he said she promised him that she did that faithfully.

I don't remember Mr. Kesse ever mentioning any type of sliding chain lock.

So, I need to look up exactly what Mr. Kesse said about the locks in case I don't have it exactly right. I would like to have it in his own words.

I'll have to ask you to be patient, though, maybe until the new forum is up? It really takes a lot of time looking this stuff up. LOL

Maybe I'll get lucky and someone else will add it before I get around to it?

A deadbolt without a key, like I have on my apartment door in Florida and I would expect on most apartment and condo doors of three stories or less in Florida, is what I expect Jennifer had on her condo door.

I'm pretty sure Jennifer and everyone else would not accept having their locks able to be opened with keys. It would be unacceptable for Jennifer since common practice for typical apartments / condos is they are installed.

However, I do not know the practices of taller buildings. I lived one year on 47th floor in Chicago. I can't remember what locks I had there. But I would expect deadbolts (without a key deadbolts) are not installed where management could not easily get to the windows. Because that's what you have to do if someone is incapacitated or dies locked in with a deadbolt because you have to break the door frame to get in. That might be unacceptable in a highrise, I don't know.

But Jennifer lived in a typical apartment / condo building for Florida and deadbolts (without keys) are typically installed. I
don't personally know what Jennifer's door looked like, though.

There is a picture of her condo door that leads to the open air hallway, but, of course, I can't find it right now. It's around, though. I believe it's purpose was to show all the things Mr. & Mrs. Kesse put up on it--for example, one of her missing flyers and the two pictures of the POI behind each fence post. I'm so frustrated over it right now because I looked at it just the other day. All I really made note of is that I believe you can see where her peep hole is.

Drats. I never really paid much attention to the locks, or even if they are evident or cut off in the photo. Anyway, I should come across it again, and I'll make sure I add it here if someone hasn't beat me to it. (And if anyone has it, please do).

Now, I do have a few pictures of the door leading to her balcony. Neither one is great quality, but to me it just looks like an ordinary doorknob--which may or may not be lockable; and then what I call a deadbolt above the doorknob. (What I call a deadbolt is one that you can turn the knob on the inside when you are home but you use a key to lock it on your way out).

I don't think anyone is interested in the balcony so I won't clutter up the thread with the pictures I have of that door.

Sorry about all the confusion.

 

[windrower]

thank you
i thought jennifer being a safe person would have a chain lock or a swing door guard
you installed from inside. These locks prevent the door to open all the wsy in case someone wants to get in.
If this is the case and the abductor had keys to jennifer's apt , it would be very easy for him to come at night and open the door

shelly111, a deadbolt--one that can be locked from inside but without any key opening on the outside--is one of the safest locks because the door cannot be opened at all with a key if the deadbolt is locked from inside, much safer than a chain lock or a swing door guard. Wouldn't have mattered if the abductor had a key to the condo, s\he wasn't getting in unless Jennifer unlocked the door from inside, or the abductor broke the door down. Hope that helps.

 

[rd_jfc]

Why assume anything? Let's try to find out for certain.

I lived in a few different condos or apartments when I was younger, and every one of them had a keyed deadbolt. I've never even seen the type of lock you're talking about; they're certainly not common here in Michigan.

Well, I'm certainly not assuming anything. I said I don't know what is on her door, but I said what is typically on doors like that. We will need to find out what was on her door. Assumption is a four letter word.

I went to my door and I see that the turn the lock from the inside is also for the keyed bolt lock, so I have two turn the locks from the inside, one with a key on the outside and one without. The one without is a real deadbolt. It can't be unlocked from outside, The other one is a normal lock but with a bolt instead of a latch. I actuallly have a latch on the doorknob below that that would hold the door shut whan you open and close it without locking it.

I searched on images for deadbolt and they all have keyholes. The whole industry is screwed up coopting the term deadbolt for their keyed crap. I mean deadbolt is supposed to mean something. It's not a trivial term.

I'm looking at images but without seeing the other side of the door you can't tell if the the thumbturn has a key to it outside or not.

I did better with unkeyed deadbolt. The technical term is apparently One-sided Keyless Deadbolt. Sheesh.

 

[rd_jfc]

BBM - Yikes. I was mostly interested in confirming if Jennifer had sliding glass doors--and she did not. But mostly that's what I was focused on. (The door leading to the balcony).

After reading your comment a page or so back on all the different types of deadbolts, I'm a bit flabbergasted. I had no idea.

Just going from memory--and I'll be the first to admit, my memory can disappoint me these days--however, I remember Mr. Kesse mentioning that he had installed a deadbolt for Jenn that had the knob you would turn from the inside. My understanding was that there was no key to it, and its purpose was solely to keep her safe once she was inside. Also, and very important here, I believe he meant, without confirming, that he installed it on her condo door leading to the open air hallway. (Not the balcony).

Now, of course, like everything other tiny detail of this case--no matter how insignificant--there is also the following information that could be conflicting.

Mr Kesse has also said that he had new locks for Jenn's condo doors but she didn't want them installed until the "bucket list" was completed. And so, he waited at her request, but now heavily regrets his decision.

So, I'm not sure if both are true, or exactly how that worked.

Another thing Mr. Kesse mentioned was that he told Jennifer about putting a chair under her doorknob at night, and he said she promised him that she did that faithfully.

I don't remember Mr. Kesse ever mentioning any type of sliding chain lock.

So, I need to look up exactly what Mr. Kesse said about the locks in case I don't have it exactly right. I would like to have it in his own words.

I'll have to ask you to be patient, though, maybe until the new forum is up? It really takes a lot of time looking this stuff up. LOL

Maybe I'll get lucky and someone else will add it before I get around to it?


There is a picture of her condo door that leads to the open air hallway, but, of course, I can't find it right now. It's around, though. I believe it's purpose was to show all the things Mr. & Mrs. Kesse put up on it--for example, one of her missing flyers and the two pictures of the POI behind each fence post. I'm so frustrated over it right now because I looked at it just the other day. All I really made note of is that I believe you can see where her peep hole is.

Drats. I never really paid much attention to the locks, or even if they are evident or cut off in the photo. Anyway, I should come across it again, and I'll make sure I add it here if someone hasn't beat me to it. (And if anyone has it, please do).

Now, I do have a few pictures of the door leading to her balcony. Neither one is great quality, but to me it just looks like an ordinary doorknob--which may or may not be lockable; and then what I call a deadbolt above the doorknob. (What I call a deadbolt is one that you can turn the knob on the inside when you are home but you use a key to lock it on your way out).

I don't think anyone is interested in the balcony so I won't clutter up the thread with the pictures I have of that door.

Sorry about all the confusion.

No, that is wonderful, Truth. It told me three things.

One, that the deadbolt didn't come with the condo, Mr. Kesse installed it. I'm somewhat flabbergasted. I would think even if it wasn't there for the apartment that's the kind of upgrade a condo would get. Pretty sad.

Two, it would imo be a deadbolt that doesn't have a key from the outside. True, it would be a key Jennifer owned and the management (and others with copies of the keys) didn't have, but still it's a freakin lock with a key. Locks can be picked. That's not security your dad installs for you.

Also I doubt it would abide by terms of condo management to install locks with keys. Management would not be able to enter. If management has keys to the doors as Mosaic did then generally TOS would reserve right to enter with notice like an apartment management imo, however I've never owned a condo and participated in condo organizations, etc., which have a lot of rules. (They also wouldn't be able to enter if you were inside and had engaged the deadbolt, but neither if you barricaded the door, put a chair under the handle, etc. It's not about entry when you are there, it's about entry when no one is there and perhaps has been abandoned, etc.)

Third, you call it a deadbolt with a key like ozoner. fridaybaker is old school like me and remembers when a deadbolt meant something. Oh the joys of learning.

thanks Truth and yeah, we'll be lucky if we emerge unscathed on the flip side, but see you guys then if not sooner.

 

[Truth Prevails]

JMO

This is a great comment, and a treat to find and read. Thank you.

I offer my comments below solely for sharing for debate on a discussion forum.

So I submit respectfully, and with appreciation for the opportunity.

I don't think this case will be solved, nor Jennifer found, until EVERY bit of information is disclosed and examined without bias, until LE fully answers her family's questions, and until her family fully and unambiguously answers the questions put to them. For example: Why is it a secret (to us, anyway) when the call to Jennifer's boyfriend began and ended? Why is that information such as that kept from the general public? (I do understand that LE should maintain the integrity of an investigation, but after twelve years, maybe it's time to try something different.)

I think some of the problem could be that Jennifer's family don't want to accept any input form law enforcement. I can understand some of their reasoning, but I'm afraid their attitude is detrimental to finding their daughter.

Start the investigation over, without ANY preconceived ideas about anyone remotely involved, including Jennifer. What does the evidence say? Let the story tell itself. Why anyone feels the need at this point to "protect" Jennifer from whatever the evidence might say is simply beyond my scope of understanding. And I don't think Jennifer was cheating on her boyfriend--but so what if she was? The only reason it would matter is if it had a direct bearing on her disappearance.

I should probably stop there. But I don't understand the reluctance to share any and all information, especially twelve years later! EVERYONE in Jennifer's life should be reexamined, even if the Kesses think someone they know just could not have harmed Jennifer.

I think it's just that she is still alive to them, and they love her so much. They want to protect her from what might feel like slander to them. I get frustrated with it, too, sometimes; but I would probably be worse if placed in their situation.

There's not one drop of evidence that any of the vile speculation is true--that's all it is: vile speculation. What makes us feel the need to do that? Jennifer was most likely exactly the kind, warm, loving person--even more beautiful on the inside than the outside--that her parents say she was.

Because someone did harm her, and it could be anyone.

Yes. Exactly. And I believe Mr. and Mrs. Kesse really have a problem believing even that it could be someone known to the family.

In my mind, this was a night time abduction--the phones being disabled between 10:20 and 10:40 the night before Jennifer was reported missing pretty clearly show that. Especially if Jennifer ALWAYS used her phone as an alarm clock, as has been stated. Something happened that night to prevent her using her phone for an alarm, since her phone was shut down.

It has also been stated that Jennifer ALWAYS took showers before work in the morning, so she must have been abducted getting ready for work on that Tuesday morning, since the shower was damp when the family got into her apartment that afternoon.

Why is one ALWAYS (the shower) believed to be true, and not the other (the phones)? Especially if the phone pings information from that Monday night is correct. Common sense should lead us to believe whatever happened, happened that Monday night after she talked to her boyfriend.

The answer here is simple--people go along with Mr. and Mrs. Kesse's theory believing it's a show of compassion to the victim's family. It's interesting, because some of those same people don't mind tearing apart their daughter's reputation if given the chance. Doesn't make sense to me.

Comments about the apartment, and how maybe things weren't how Jennifer usually had them. Well, she had just returned from a trip. Her makeup could have been out and not in its usual spot because she was unpacking and setting things out to put away later. Same for the blow dryer, and other items that seemed to be in places they were not usually kept. She obviously had not finished unpacking completely if there were still items in her bag.

Someone upthread (sorry, cannot remember who) said s\he thought someone Jennifer knew (friend, coworker, etc.) came to her door, with a reasonable request or problem that s\he needed Jennifer's help with. Jennifer probably wouldn't have felt the need to do a "safe call" because she was with someone she knew. I tend to agree with this.

I do, too; but it's a theory that has it's problems when times and history regarding who this victim was are taken into account.

Start investigating with a clean slate, no preconceived ideas about what someone certainly would or would not do, and as I said before, let the evidence tell the story. Because I think it will if given the chance without the chains of supposition holding it back.

I agree, but we are all sitting here with our own preconceived ideas; and I don't believe Mr. & Mrs. Kesse nor law enforcement are any different.

I think if this case is ever to move forward, though, it will be through the efforts of law enforcement. We don't know what they already have--we think we do, but we really probably do not. Is there really 20 seconds of the POI video missing? What's on it, if there is? Do they have even more video that they never released? Why won't they say exactly where "in Jennifer's vehicle" the fiber containing an incomplete DNA profile and the partial print was found? Did they find something they are not revealing? Anything could be true or untrue. We don't know.

What did they miss? Well, we don't know that either, but I don't think it's wise to "throw the baby out with the bath water"--to use a cliche. I understand why they didn't do forensics on the condo. Any evidence lucky enough to be left there would have been considered so contaminated that any joke of a defense lawyer could and would have had it tossed out. Jennifer's abductor may very well have been right in that condo offering his condolences to the family and helping them hand out flyers. That would have been his excuse if LE found his DNA there. It would have been a waste of time.

Would they have found the scene of the crime? Maybe, maybe not. But the Kesses don't think so because they believe Jennifer was abducted on her way to her car on the morning of the 24th--so why make all the fuss about LE not bringing a team of crime scene investigators into Jennifer's condo?

As does any missing person and the families impacted so terribly by the unknown, Jennifer deserves to be found, and her family deserve answers and justice.

For me, it's really about justice for Jennifer which includes finding her and bringing her home to her parents, and arresting the person or persons responsible. They need to be exposed and held to answer. They should not be free to live their lives after all they took from Jennifer.

 

[shelly111]

thank you
now i got it😊

 

[forestpuppy]

I had been pretty obsessed with this case since the podcast was released but I admit that I am not 100% up to date with every piece of information out there... BUT.. What about the possibility that Jennifer met up with someone (an ex, a co-worker, just someone else she was seeing in general) in a parking lot somewhere else in order to avoid the chance of her boyfriend or someone else catching her in the act? She gets out of her car and into his car-planning to take the phone and drop it off afterwards - which explains why she brought it with her ... When she tells this person she's not going to break it off with the bf, they get mad and do something rash... they then move the car back ( by paying off a local bum or an underpaid worker who needed extra cash-explaining the uniform) but the evidence is in theirs-- which is why nothing really showed in her car? This could explain no forced entry, minimal gas usage and the phones being disabled at the same time... Were parking lot cameras checked (I'm sure they were)? Did anyone who was directly connected to her or question sell or trade in their cars? Had she paid for a pre-paid shipping label for the phone? If so, this could explain why she didn't have a wallet...I do this all the time.. Idk.. just spit balling. This case drives me insane!!

 

[rd_jfc]

With the general usage of deadbolt being what it is, I looked it up to see if I was misremembering. Nope, it's old school:

https://www.hunker.com/13413996/the-origin-of-the-name-deadbolt-lock
"The word deadbolt, as applied to a lock, came into use in 1902, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, when it described a bolt that was "dead," rather than "live," meaning a key could unlock it from outside the house."

"The modern deadbolt might be a cylindrical slide bolt, or a keyed lock without an opening mechanism, like a knob."

end quote

 

[liz b.]

Wish that LE had processed the condo as a crime scene. They could maybe have found some indications if Jennifer had been harmed there. eg blood drops, or blood splatter which had been cleaned up. Also wish LE had taken cadaver dogs through the condo, and to the car. I think the car was likely the crime scene, but jmo. Processing both the condo and the car would have enabled LE to perhaps eliminate one ( or both) locations as being the primary crime scene.

I don't understand why the OPD didn't reclassify this case as a homicide without a body early on. It would have given LE more power, and enabled them to use the resources of other agencies. I mean, this was a woman who was in daily contact with her family and bf. And then there was nothing ? JMO 12 tears is a very long time. JMO

 

[rd_jfc]

Wish that LE had processed the condo as a crime scene. They could maybe have found some indications if Jennifer had been harmed there. eg blood drops, or blood splatter which had been cleaned up. Also wish LE had taken cadaver dogs through the condo, and to the car. I think the car was likely the crime scene, but jmo. Processing both the condo and the car would have enabled LE to perhaps eliminate one ( or both) locations as being the primary crime scene.

I don't understand why the OPD didn't reclassify this case as a homicide without a body early on. It would have given LE more power, and enabled them to use the resources of other agencies. I mean, this was a woman who was in daily contact with her family and bf. And then there was nothing ? JMO 12 tears is a very long time. JMO

A couple of problems. One, as I understand from posts through the years, the family did not treat the condo as a crime scene and having done that, one, no one else is going to treat it as a crime scene if you aren't, and two, once disrupted, made over etc., it is no longer a crime scene that can be worked.

Now hindsight is 20/20, and part of that is wishing it had been treated as a crime scene from everyone and processed as such in the beginning.

Second, just as in Chandra Levy case, police would not take the disappearance seriously. They would have to take it seriously immediately and they didn't. I don't know when, maybe when the car was found two days later.

 

[Markybug]

I had been pretty obsessed with this case since the podcast was released but I admit that I am not 100% up to date with every piece of information out there... BUT.. What about the possibility that Jennifer met up with someone (an ex, a co-worker, just someone else she was seeing in general) in a parking lot somewhere else in order to avoid the chance of her boyfriend or someone else catching her in the act? She gets out of her car and into his car-planning to take the phone and drop it off afterwards - which explains why she brought it with her ... When she tells this person she's not going to break it off with the bf, they get mad and do something rash... they then move the car back ( by paying off a local bum or an underpaid worker who needed extra cash-explaining the uniform) but the evidence is in theirs-- which is why nothing really showed in her car? This could explain no forced entry, minimal gas usage and the phones being disabled at the same time... Were parking lot cameras checked (I'm sure they were)? Did anyone who was directly connected to her or question sell or trade in their cars? Had she paid for a pre-paid shipping label for the phone? If so, this could explain why she didn't have a wallet...I do this all the time.. Idk.. just spit balling. This case drives me insane!!

Supposedly, the co-worker scrapped his 6yr old car shortly after ( this is from BOC , so unsure re factual) , if true could be interesting?

 

[Ozoner]

Supposedly, the co-worker scrapped his 6yr old car shortly after ( this is from BOC , so unsure re factual) , if true could be interesting?

What does BOC stand for?

I believe Jennifer's co-worker has gotten away with murder for twelve years now. I think he staged things and then got himself arrested on purpose in order create an alibi--which worked only becuse the OPD was too stupid to figure out the real timeline.

 

[Markybug]

What does BOC stand for?

I believe Jennifer's co-worker has gotten away with murder for twelve years now. I think he staged things and then got himself arrested on purpose in order create an alibi--which worked only becuse the OPD was too stupid to figure out the real timeline.

Blink on crime (website)

I believe he did not get arrested the day of her abduction (few days before?) for speeding?

I would like clarification that he was definitely late (noon) the morning she did not show for work ??

 

[liz b.]

A couple of problems. One, as I understand from posts through the years, the family did not treat the condo as a crime scene and having done that, one, no one else is going to treat it as a crime scene if you aren't, and two, once disrupted, made over etc., it is no longer a crime scene that can be worked.

Now hindsight is 20/20, and part of that is wishing it had been treated as a crime scene from everyone and processed as such in the beginning.

Second, just as in Chandra Levy case, police would not take the disappearance seriously. They would have to take it seriously immediately and they didn't. I don't know when, maybe when the car was found two days later.

Have known of primary crime scenes that have been processed years after a disappearance, and turned up evidence. eg the McStay family murders. However, it is probably too late in this case, and the car is no longer available anyway. Given that OPD held onto that video during the crucial first few days, I wonder what else they are not allowing the public to see/know.