Discussion in '2000's Missing' started by Shay, Oct 11, 2005.
It took boots on the ground to find Jacob Wetterling’s killer. Eloc soul, JBrown and Sher. They found the info.
I think people are going to have to actually go on site
Here is the best pic of the watch he was wearing when he went missing.
And for the record, I believe the waters at St. John's has been thoroughly investigated, and its very not likely that Josh would be in there...but power to you. Good luck!
DarkJodo, I don't think Josh is in the water either, but at the rate this case is going, it probably doesn't hurt to take another look. In your opinion, what is your best guess about what happened to Josh? I know there are very mixed opinions among those of us who have been following Josh's case from the beginning. Still, I constantly second guess myself after what happened with the Wetterling case. I am still angry about the slip shod way that was handled. And it gives me pause to wonder, does Stearns County have some critical information they have refused to share "for the sake of the integrity of the case." Oh the irony.
I'm just following where the dog went, and that was to the shoreline of Stumpf Lake. Others will say he was picked up by a car there. In my opinion looking at this caae as it is, if he wasn't missed in the water, this case would be easier to solve. You would know who had it out for Josh. You would have better evidence supporting an abduction, but there is no direct evidence of one. The main thing is not to say he couldn't still be in the water, but to remain open minded to it. Thats what I see anyway.
The dog never made it to the shoreline. It made it to the road on the culvert, which was 40+ feet and uphill with massive obstructing brush from the edge of the water. The most credible scent tracing dog used on day 2 of the search never led investigators directly to the water.
In my personal opinion, I believe that he was most likely abducted by an individual in a vehicle either by force, coercion, or providing false information.
Ok so anything I have read about the dog clearly indicates that the dog led investigators to the shoreline of Stumpf Lake. What is your source of your better knowledge on this?
Besides the point you are trying to make with the obstructing brush the lakes still became a very significant part of trying to find Joshua. The lakes were drained to lower levels and searched with a dog in the boat by law enforcement. The Trident Foundation consisting of retired LE personnel were called in five months later to also search after winter had passed. Trident concluded there was a remote possibility that he could still be in the water but that they were unsuccessful.
Is the driver also Bruce Wolmering?
My source comes from a direct interview of the actual dog handler that was used that day of the search. Also in the first report of St. Cloud Times article on Josh. From that point on, SCSO would use the words like “shoreline”, “edge of the water”, and “indication in the lake” to justify their actions on focusing on the water instead of
investigating other areas.
Is everyone quite sure that if a perp was responsible for Josh's disappearance, that it would be a male? speculation, imo.
Sister Anne Marie Biermaier Made Aware of Allegations | BehindThePineCurtain.com
Ann Marie Biermaier | BehindThePineCurtain.com
I'm going with a male suspect primarily because Josh was surrounded by so many credibly accused monks, and, because of the student athlete who complained that the abbot wasn't doing anything about a monk who had been harassing him. Then there's the paper Josh was writing that dealt with sexual abuse at the abby. Of course anything is possible, and everything is worthy of examination at this point. Wollmering has always seemed suspicious to me. DarkJodo, were you ever able to find out what, if anything, the police found in Wollmering's room? I still believe more than one person on that campus knows something about Josh's disappearance. But fear is a powerful thing, and there is nothing more frightening than dealing with an institution that is apparently made of Teflon.
Do we know when LE began looking at and interviewing certain monks as the possible abductor? Or have they actually never done that and only worked on the water?
If Josh was taken by a vehicle I would believe it to be a forced entty into the vehicle. Josh only had one block left to walk back to his dorm from the point we've designated. I think he would have turned down an offered ride. But this means the perp would have parked in the middle of the road then got out and secured an adult into their car without Josh being able to get out. They then drove away while not being heard or witnessed by anyone else. And that is why unless the perp confessses we won't know what happened.
I don't think it's beyond the pale to think that Josh might have gotten inside the car of a monk he knew - a la, "Josh, I need to move some heavy boxes over at the (fill in the blank), should only take a few minutes, can you help me?" etc. Further, as I've mentioned before, a monk who is involved in nefarious activity may well have known some criminally minded people in the community. It would not surprise me a bit.
I am almost 100% certain Sheriff Sanner never authorized any of his minions to interview any monk during the beginning of this case, and most probably never. Anyone care to correct me, I would love to know.
Can someone kindly tell me how to edit a post? This post allowed me to edit, but the one above did not.
You may have surpassed the allotted time for editing, otherwise erase your message, highlight then backspace, type dbm.( deleted by me).
I would most likely agree with this although I do not lnow for sure. The monks still weren't revealed enough for who they really were back then. But monks are groomers and noone has figured out yet who was grooming Josh. Not even his roomates or closest friends. I haven't heard anyone crying out that this monk is suspicious and needs to be looked at. All we have is a monk that said "I knew of Joshua, but I did not know him personally" and that was somehow very suspicious to the family. How would any monk know of a paper Josh was writing if josh never even yet handed the paper in? Or did he? I think the monks brought the blame of this case onto themselves because of what thet've been accused of, but did a monk kill Joshua and get away with it? and stayed living on this campus all this time? It seems unlikely.
I believe there is written documentation with regard to sexual abuse by monks at St. John's that goes decades back. So I think there were a number of people who knew the illegal activities occuring on that campus. Here's one link I found that talks about it: Book Says Abuse by Priests Nothing New Author Says Catholic Church Has Had a Problem for Centuries, Still Isn't Handling It Well, by David Yonke, The Toledo Blade, July 1, 2006. I know there were suicides that resulted from young people being sexually abused at St. John's (one example:https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/12/18/spanier-parents-seek-change-at-st-johns-minnesota ). The question of why a monk might be responsible for killing Joshua -- Joshua may have received unwanted attention from a particular monk and was threatening to tell, and/or, he knew of fellow classmates who experienced such. All speculation, and unless and until someone talks, we're left to ponder this. Pat Marker, Patrick J. Wall, Dr. Immelman and author and fellow sleuth Rob Ebben (pen name 'Robert M. Dudley") as well as some others in this group could speak to this topic far better than I. What other ideas do people have about what the motive might have been for Josh's possible murder?