AMBER ALERT WI - Jayme Closs, 13, Barron, missing after parents found shot, 15 Oct 2018 *endangered* #11

Status
Not open for further replies.
" Wallow in tragedy" Geeze, how can one not feel for two parents and their child in the supposed safety of their home, being killed and the child taken in the middle of the night. I for one don't wallow, but I do everyday throughout the day-check to see if this 13 year old (now orphan) has been found. On Saturday two people taken down will have a double funeral. That's quite sad.
Please don't assume I don't feel for the victims in each and every case I follow. Please. Don't.

What I meant, and I thought was obvious, was that I'm not here to be entertained by tragedy (like some people think following true crime involves). Instead, I want to learn from each case.

<modsnip - rude/personalizing>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He doesnt know why but he firmly believes Denise was the intended target because if she wasnt and James was there would be no need for the killer to enter the home.

Imo that does make more sense to me. They wouldnt have to risk even entering the home since James was shot right at his door if the intended target was James all along.

Jmo

I'd agree with him that the killer continuing into the home would lead one to believe that James was not the target, but I don't see how that also excludes Jayme from being the target.
 
My 13 year old daughter isn't allowed social media - my almost 15 year old son was just allowed to get instagram (but only instagram) this year when he started 9th grade.

ETA she does have friends on social media at that age, but it's definitely not the norm. IMO
My kids too. I have a 13 year old and a 15 year old and neither are allowed social media. Most of their friends don’t have it either, it’s partially because they go to a low tech school where most parents are against social media use. It keeps them safer, IMO.
 
forgive me because I dont want to say this but: The only reason to take her is either, shes going to alert someone if you leave her , therefore killing your Head start or she can ID them. I'm guessing she can ID them :(
 
I've thought that, too. I know, though, that Facebook requires its users to be at least 13, so it wouldn't surprise me if she was relatively new to the world of social media and hadn't had much time to make a larger digital footprint. On your same vein of thinking, though, I have noted the lack of selfies on her account, which does make me wonder if she has her own phone.

Source: Self - have many teenage relatives and selfies seem to be a cornerstone of SM if they have a phone.
It does seem that the pics on her FB were taken by someone else (I'm guessing her mother or friends). Speaks to the fact that she probably doesn't have a cell phone or her parents monitored her activity.
 
My 13 year old daughter isn't allowed social media - my almost 15 year old son was just allowed to get instagram (but only instagram) this year when he started 9th grade.

ETA she does have friends on social media at that age, but it's definitely not the norm. IMO

I reapectfully beg to differ that it's not the norm.
 
I think if he feels comfortable saying he believes DC was the target and if he has contacts that he had been speaking to, then his opinion that DC was the target might be correct. I think LE and the FBI have a pretty good idea who the target was based on what they found at the scene regarding injuries, as well as victimology for all three victims and all that entails. The only thing that doesn't make sense to me, as others have also posted, is why take Jayme from the scene and harm her in another location? It just seems so risky to bring a 13 year old child with them from the home, but then again, it's impossible for people like ourselves who would never intentionally harm anyone to apply logic to an UNSUB who could commit such a heinous crime to begin with. Thanks for posting this info! I hope and pray Jayme is alive

A way it would fit is if Jayne ran, they could have caught up with her elsewhere
 
That's really interesting. I partially agree. I have never thought James was the target for that very reason that it appears he was shot first. Also if someone had a problem with him they had many opportunities to shoot him when he was away from his home so that his wife and child didn't need to be killed as well. The same, however, goes for Denise. Both the adults worked factory jobs and probably had schedules that would have been predictable for anyone who wanted to target one of them. They probably often drove to and from work late at night and early morning. It would not be hard to find a moment when one of them was alone on their way to or from work.

Where the above theory loses me is that after James was killed at the front door there were two people left in the house-- one was shot to death and the other was taken. Why would we assume Denise was the target and not Jayme? The perp could have just as easily killed Denise and left Jayme alive. Jayme was probably hiding or terrified and could have been threatened not to tell if she saw them or tied up and left there so she couldn't call for help. If it was someone well known to the family and they only wanted to kill Denise but leave Jayme alive, they would have been wise to wear a ski mask or something. If they knew the family well they would know Jayme was there and would have had a plan if Jayme got in the way-- either coming prepared to kill her as well or plan to hide their identity from her. It makes no sense to plan to take Jayme if the target was Denise. And it makes no sense to take the child on a whim either (unless a random attack by a monster like Thomas Evans in SC who raped both the mother and 4 year old daughter after a home invasion, taking 4 year old HA with him to abuse later). But for someone known to the family targeting Denise-- why take Jayme? It seems more logical to me to conclude that both James and Denise stood in the way of the actual target-- Jayme. MOO.
This is some of soundest reasoning I’ve read in a while. Very insightful.
 
I'm just not so sure that Denise was the intended victim. Did he say then- why they took Jayme?

Aside from that, very sad to hear that he thinks Jayme has been killed. Sadly- I tend to agree, but hard to hear a professional say that.

My 10 year-old daughter commented, "They probably killed her...I mean, why would they keep her alive?" Of course, I couldn't give her the other possibility.
 
forgive me because I dont want to say this but: The only reason to take her is either, shes going to alert someone if you leave her , therefore killing your Head start or she can ID them. I'm guessing she can ID them :(
I agree - I think she can ID them. I think the perp was someone known to the family.

JMOpinion
 
forgive me because I dont want to say this but: The only reason to take her is either, shes going to alert someone if you leave her , therefore killing your Head start or she can ID them. I'm guessing she can ID them :(
Thing is, if she can ID them why not just kill her too? Hmm...Okay. Just had a thought. If DC was the intended victim, why would you not shoot JC too, especially if she could identify you? Is it because he couldn't shoot the child? He didn't shoot the dog either, was that for the same reason? Anger was spent, he regretted his actions and couldn't bring himself to shoot JC? Maybe he does know her and he cares for her in a non-sexual fashion?
 
Thank you, elektroangel. From the link:

Press Release

October 23, 2018

Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald thanks the 2,000 volunteers who are assisting law enforcement today in the expanded routine search for articles of evidentiary value that may be related to the disappearance of 13 year old Jayme Closs from our community here in Barron, Wisconsin. Jayme remains missing & endangered. The outpouring of hope and support from the community and law enforcement has been overwhelming.

We have received over 1,400 tips to date, of those, 1,100 have been closed so far, and we are aggressively working the others. As the search continues we have recovered items collected by our volunteer search groups and assessing those items. None of the items collected, thus far, appear to be connected to the disappearance.

There will be a news briefing, in person, tomorrow, Wednesday, October 24, 2018 at 4:00 p.m. at the Barron County Sheriff’s Office, 1420 State Highway 25 North. The briefing will be hosted by Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald, along FBI Special Agent in Charge, Justin Tolomeo, and a representative of Wisconsin Department of Criminal Investigation.

Please continue to provide us your tips, every tip is important: 1-855-744-3879 or jaymetips@co.barron.wi.us

Per Chris Fitzgerald, Barron County Sheriff
 
Okay I know some of you may not care for Mark Furhman at times including myself but the thread was closed at the time he was being interviewed on Fox.

Since he spoke I can't get out of my mind what he said because it ALL made so much common sense and none of it I had ever even considered.

Anyway for those who may be interested I will try to post it in my own words for you.

He said he believes the evidence shows that Denise was the intended target. Here is the clear reason he gave. If James had been the intended target the mission would have been over right at the front door with no need to enter the home. They would have shot James and quickly left probably before Denise could have even seen who it was.

But he said they purposefully went inside to murder Denise. He also said the crime scene can reveal who may be the intended target. Such as if one victim suffered more gunshot wounds than another victim. Or if one victim had other type of injuries done by the killer beyond the gunshots themselves.

He said he does believe that Jayme has been killed and thinks the police know that too and know they are in recovery mode now.

He also said this which makes sense to me. He said the experts on the ground have the ability in less than a day's time to know if there are any vehicles in this county of 45000 that matches the 2 vehicles in question.

So he thinks the police already know the vehicles aren't from the county this happened in. He said they will go county by county searching the DMV data base looking for possible matches and interviewing anyone who may own the same type of vehicles crossing them off one by one.

So what do all of you think about this? I found all of it so facisinating. Jmo though
Thank you so much for posting this fresh eyes opinion from the highly qualified Mark Fuhrman. I've read all of his books. Very interesting.
 
Back to phones. The 911 initial report says that after the 911 call from the cell in the house was made and lost, the 911 operator tried calling back the number, no answer. 911 operator then called the landline, which had been "disconnected" What do you sleuths interpret that to mean? And thank you for the "welcome". Using my phone to type so sorry for format issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
77
Guests online
2,425
Total visitors
2,502

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,964
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top