AMBER ALERT WI - Jayme Closs, 13, Barron, missing after parents found shot, 15 Oct 2018 *endangered* #23

Status
Not open for further replies.
My thought has been that the party made for a late day. I think we have reports of Jayme on the phone a bit late. And maybe she wanted to wait up for dad to come home. What if she was taking a late bath when everything happened and Denise ran to the bathroom to protect her? Then you get a killer coming into a bathroom where's there's a naked teen.
Denise was on the phone that evening, not Jayme from my understanding.
 
I cannot buy Sheriff Fitzgerald doesn't know if any of the family members, even extended members of the family were at the casino. Certainly the casino knows. The employees would've been scouring that footage just out of curiosity, and would've reported seeing any of the family members. He has to know.

Bet my last dollar he knows. For some reason he does not want to implicate James in something.
 
It' has been awhile since I've caught up with Jayme's case. Has there been anything new?

Nothing big. But we have learned a few things.
-James owned firearms, the have all been accounted for (according to LE)
-Denise & her sister talked on the phone that evening around 10pm (according to family)
-Jamye did not have an older boyfriend (according to family)

What else? Anyone?

Edit for spelling, definition
 
Last edited:
I don't think they do. Every video I've ever seen of cars passing buses was either set up as a one-time deal by the media doing investigative reporting or with the bus driver taping her phone to the windshield for the same purpose. I would be surprised if this school district had actual dash cams. This is a major aggravation to me, how vehicles constantly put children at risk at bus stops, so I've watched quite a few of these videos.

I have read in the newspaper in MN in the court section that people get busted for school bus violations. I was thinking perhaps there is a cam to capture the license plate? Or is the driver able to write down the plate?

I wonder how they are caught
 
I just can't imagine that if someone had such a grudge or issue with James or Denise, that someone close to them wouldn't know about it. Surely there would be phone evidence OR witnesses at work OR witnesses at church or dance OR family or friends confided in at least to some degree if not the whole story shared.

If someone is even cross with me at the grocery store I'm likely to mention it to someone, you know? Car cuts me off? Mentioning it. But someone so hateful and full of rage to come shoot me dead at home? I'm pretty sure I would have talked about it. People would know if there was some major conflict that might get me murdered. Right??

If, on the other hand, there was some SECRET, then it makes sense no one would know. Like what though? An affair? Money troubles? Not sure, but what else wouldn't you confide to someone close? Ideas?

The longer this goes with no break it really starts leaning towards random home invasion to me.

MOO
 
I had thought perhaps if Mr. Closs had a trail cam on the premises maybe they would bring a specialized search dog for that to try and find it - being that there is nobody around to ask where it is and it may have relevant photographs onboard its memory chip. But this also brings the possibility: did someone place an electronic bugging device or wifi-enabled camera of some sort at the Closs premises unbeknownst to them? Might it still be there?
Has it been confirmed LE put the motion detectors in, or was that assumed? I, personally, assumed it was LE, but todays dicussion has me wondering if they were already there and LE was able to gain access to the feed?
 
Just some info on the capabilities of electronic sniffing K9 dog for those interested.
These Police Dogs Sniff Out Electronic Devices

Also in reference to phone records, the cases I've seen referenced where phone companies fight to release information seem to involve a suspects phone as opposed to a murder victims phone. This article was a year prior to the latest Supreme Court ruling but seems to make sense even after reading the ruling.
"A cell phone at the scene of the crime that belongs to the deceased doesn’t need a warrant. Since the person isn’t alive there’s no concern about his privacy or finding evidence to use against him. Just like a person’s locked diary, it has potential evidence value and will be seized for that purpose. Police will take reasonable steps to open it without damage. A cell phone that’s secured with a password may be opened using software or equipment designed specifically for police use. In general, American courts hold that privacy concerns stop when a person dies. If the person was obviously murdered, the presumption is the deceased would want his killer found and prosecuted."
https://www.quora.com/Does-the-poli...urder-victims-phone-or-do-they-need-a-warrant

In reference to the latest SC ruling on access to cell phone data and emergencies:
"Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in his majority opinion that the decision "is a narrow one," and that it won't affect the ability to use location data for emergencies...."
Supreme Court rules police must have a warrant to track your cell phone
I think
Sorry if choppy or hard to follow. My screen keeps freezing.
MOO

Since Jayme’s fate is unknown but she is a juvenile, I wonder how the access by LE would be with her phone
 
Nothing big. But we have learned a few things.
-James own guns, the have all been accounted for (according to LE)
-Denise & her sister talked on the phone that evening around 10pm (according to family)
-Jamie did not have an older boyfriend (according to family)

What else? Anyone?

Jaymes phone is in LE possession and was found plugged into the charger in the kitchen.
 
We know James had guns in the house and they were all accounted for. From the 911 call logs They said "No guns located at this time" which would indicate that James did not grab one of his guns. If he did hear a kick at the door, I would think that would be the first thing he would try and do. We also know that the guns used were not one of his so the perp didn't take JC's gun and use it on JC and DC.
How do we know all of this? The comment "No guns located at this time" IMO, means just that. As far as I've read and viewed, nothing has been stated as to what weapon was used or whose weapon was used. Do you have a link for source?
 
Nothing big. But we have learned a few things.
-James owned firearms, the have all been accounted for (according to LE)
-Denise & her sister talked on the phone that evening around 10pm (according to family)
-Jamie did not have an older boyfriend (according to family)

What else? Anyone?

Edit for spelling, definition
Denise/bathroom
 
Has it been confirmed LE put the motion detectors in, or was that assumed? I, personally, assumed it was LE, but todays dicussion has me wondering if they were already there and LE was able to gain access to the feed?
I’ll try and find the article, but a news report said that the cameras were monitored by Wisconsin state authorities.

They saw activity and alerted local law enforcement that there was a break in. Police quickly apprehended the thief.
 
I’ve been thinking a lot about the timing of this crime. Why the middle of the night and a Sunday to boot? I agree with many of you in thinking Jayme was the target. So why not the bus stop, etc.? Perhaps we’re thinking backwards. What if it had nothing to do with ease, availability, etc. Maybe it had everything to do with the perp’s availability. I’m thinking he may work a swing shift, and committing this crime during the day or evening is just not convenient for him. I’m also thinking Monday may be one of his days off. So, he goes to work Sunday. Gets off around 10 or 11, grabs his supplies and makes his big move. He already has Monday off, so he doesn’t have to worry about missing work. He’s not on someone’s radar, because he has kept working, like normal. JMO

I think the timing could simply be explained two ways:

1. Getaway time -- Without the 911 call no one would have known she was missing until school began on Monday. Even then, it would still take few more hours after that before anyone went to the house to check on the family after not being able to contact the parents. That gives the perp a 10+ hour head start on a getaway. Taking her from a bus stop or during the day means she is going to be reported missing a lot sooner. A daytime abduction would maybe yield an hour or two of getaway time at the absolute most, probably less than that. Taking her at night gives you way more time.

2. Lack of others around -- If you try to take her from the bus stop you run the risk of being seen by someone on the road. Or even if you try to invade the family home in the morning you aren't going to have the cover of night, and there is going to be traffic going by. The likelihood that someone would remember your car or see you dragging her out of the house is fairly high. Between the darkness and lack of traffic at 1am you are far more likely to go unnoticed. There are far more obstacles to avoid at 8am than there are at 1am.

Take those things into account, if the goal of the crime was to take Jayme then doing it at night makes the most sense.
 
I would think they'd want to rule out that no one had a second phone or things like tablets. If Jayme had been groomed or in contact with someone they may have provided a phone for her to use. I do find it interesting Jayme's phone was in the kitchen. I would assume most teenage girls would want their cell phone close by. Do most/many parents make kids leave their phones in a public place after a certain time? My kids don't have cell phones yet, but I let them keep their tablets/computers in their rooms. They use their tablets for their morning alarms and watch videos until their designated "turn 'em off" time.

RSBM

I have an almost 13 year old and a 15 year old. Phones are turned into myself and hubby at the end of the day. We know the passwords and kids know we occasionally browse through their phones. There’s just too much temptations and dangers out there for kids today. Also, this is a pretty popular procedure with my friends and their kids.
 
Has it been confirmed LE put the motion detectors in, or was that assumed? I, personally, assumed it was LE, but todays dicussion has me wondering if they were already there and LE was able to gain access to the feed?
When the man broke in to get clothing of Jaymes’ LE said he was caught because of the cameras they had put around in the house. Which I read here, is not a common thing that happens typically. Did the killer(s) leave something behind? Who would be that crazy to come back to the crime scene? I have no idea.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
87
Guests online
3,999
Total visitors
4,086

Forum statistics

Threads
592,189
Messages
17,964,845
Members
228,714
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top