Discussion in '2000's Missing' started by Shay, Oct 11, 2005.
I would add Andert as well, but where is the source that he was closest to the party?
This is incredibly long but it is about Catholic orphanages and sexual abuse by nuns and priests.
it is horrifying. Was Josh finding out this kind of info?
6 or so names is a good amount of investigative work to do, will the SCSO do it?
Also posted this on the Jesse Ross thread.
Unrelated, just noting that Jesse Ross, Jason Jolkowski and Joshua Guimond (besides all having "J' names) also share strong religious backgrounds..
Fwiw.. this man finally came forward in his 60's.
Lawsuit: Famed Jesuit abused boy 1,000 times around world
December 30, 2019 lengthy article.
"Goldberg has filed a lawsuit claiming he was abused more than 1,000 times in multiple states and countries by the late Donald McGuire, a prominent American Jesuit priest who had close ties to Mother Teresa"
IL - IL - Jesse Ross, 20, Chicago, 21 Nov 2006
MN - MN - Joshua Guimond, 20, Collegeville, 9 Nov 2002 - #2
NE - NE - Jason Jolkowski, 19, Omaha, 13 June 2001 - #3
Reading about these priests is sickening but mind boggling. It is not an isolated few. It is everywhere and so many.
It does not sound like any priests develop a conscience and tell on others, does it?
"(October 25, 2002) Father Tom Andert was a faculty resident at Metten Court, campus housing at Saint John’s University."
Andert Will Attend Reunion This Weekend, His Victim Will Not | BehindThePineCurtain.com
ugh. There were many reports about different monks on the pinecurtain site. They are now not there. They were horrifying.
what a deal. Molesters advising molesters who were molesting kids
Monks, monks, and more monks. But after 17 years not one spill of the beans for this case. How has one or more of them been able to pull this off? Someone knows, but I'm not hearing anything. The truth is we are simply blaming them just because and that is all it is and has been. We need something better soon.
Keep in mind nefarious secrets have been successfully kept for 50+ years with many of these individuals. It's not beyond comprehension that they could keep this a secret as well.
Maybe it will simply turn out to be somebody Joshua's age who is jealous of him and competitive?
Exactly, finally a fresh idea. We've been looking at these monks for years and the only thing that sticks with them is what we already know about them. I really don't believe a monk was sitting out in a hunting blind at midnight ready to kill a random student. It is far from their style and imo would make it even easier to single out a monk that would kill. I'm more concerned about his friends who brushed off his intoxication and also deleted countless files from his computer.
There's plenty of factual reasons to be focused on the monks. Bona fide pedophiles and rapists residing within a stones thrown of where a person disappears with zero "0" evidence or information to suggest some random person was cruising through campus. I believe the focus is in the right direction.
I do like your new found investigative tactics though, I commend you for that! You come a long way since your days of statements of clear defamation per se, and allegations with absolutely no foundation. Have you ever called the "obviously innocent man in the farmhouse" yet to profusely apologize for your words? I'm going to guess you haven't...
But it's sincerely a great change to see Sas.... Keep on this mindset!
Your continued beef with that comment falls on the decisions of John Sanner and his administrations idea to publicly name DR a person of interest. I took that as far as I could until DR was cleared or convicted, and I stand by that comment still today. I will continue to grind on any information that has come to light in this investigation.
Keep grinding on that
Keep grinding on new information, that's great. But let me give you some advice, or what I call common sense...
"Person of Interest", has no meaning as a term used in law. It means nothing in court. It's a cheap tactic used by frustrated law enforcement. The FBI suggests that the term not be used at all. It doesn't even amount to "suspect". And it certainly doesn't mean the person is guilty of anything, physically or mentally abused by their father, molested by their mother, that they're not normal, that they committed arson, or that they committed any damage or harm to anyone at all. So quit justifying your actions by passing the buck to the SCSO because I never heard them say one of those ridiculously false and defamatory statements you made. Use you head!
You got a freebie on that one, I wouldn't press your luck again. I know I would've sued the f¥(k out of you. Just think a little, and you'll make the world just a little bit better! Have yourself a wonderful and warm day!
"You got a freebie on that one, I wouldn't press your luck again. I know I would've sued the f¥(k out of you."
Well you wouldn't have won, LE provided the ammo and I fired upon it. Also I might offer to tread more lightly on naming monks in public where there is no solid evidence tying them to Joshua whatsoever.
Joshua Cheney Guimond – The Charley Project
Missing From Collegeville, Minnesota
Classification Endangered Missing
Date of Birth 06/18/1982 (37)
Age 20 years old
Height and Weight 5'10 - 6'0, 170 pounds
Clothing/Jewelry Description A gray Gap or St. John University's hooded sweatshirt, blue jeans, and a wristwatch.
Distinguishing Characteristics Caucasian male. Blond hair, blue eyes. Guimond He has a vertical scar on his shoulder about four inches long and half an inch wide. He is supposed to wear eyeglasses or contact lenses, but did not have either with him at the time of his disappearance. His nickname is Josh.
Details of Disappearance
Guimond was last seen between approximately 11:00 p.m. and midnight on November 9, 2002, leaving Metten Court, a dormitory on the north end of the St. John's University campus in Collegeville, Minnesota. He was a junior at the university at the time he disappeared, majoring in political science.
Guimond left a party at Matten Court to go to the bathroom and when he did not return within fifteen minutes, his friends assumed he had walked back to his on-campus apartment at St. Maur House in the middle of campus. He apparently never arrived there, however. His friends called his apartment shortly after they last saw him, and assumed he was asleep when they got no answer.
Guimond's car was later found undisturbed on the campus. His friends reported him missing the next evening when they could not find him and he failed to appear a school function. His eyeglasses, contact lenses and credit cards were left behind and no personal belongings were missing from his apartment. At the time he vanished, he was not wearing clothing appropriate for the weather.
In the hours after Guimond disappeared, and on subsequent days, someone erased items from his computer hard drive. It isn't clear who did this or whether the erasure is connected to his disappearance. Some of the information that was erased, and later recovered, was about making fake identification cards.
One theory is that Guimond was struck by a vehicle on the night of his disappearance and killed. Some of the monks who at St. John's Abbey, attached to the university, had a history of alcohol abuse, and idea is that one of them hit him, and decided to cover up the crime to avoid a scandal. There isn't any evidence to support this, however; it remains a matter of speculation.
At around the time Guimond, disappeared, three other college-aged people disappeared from the Minnesota and Wisconsin areas. They were all Minnesota residents, and all of them vanished on weekend nights after having visited bars or parties.
The bodies of two of them were subsequently found in local bodies of water. The third, Erika Dalquist, was the victim of a homicide. Her remains were found on May 15, 2004 on property owned by the grandparents of William Gene Myears, a long-time suspect in her case, and he was charged with second-degree murder.
None of the missing young adults knew each other. However, it was suggested that the four cases might linked, as it is statistically improbable that four people of similar age would randomly vanish from the same area at around the same time. In addition, all three of the men who disappeared were college students with similar heights and builds, and were described as high achievers.
Police investigated and, citing "glaring differences" in the four cases, stated there was no connection.
Guimond's loved ones say it is uncharacteristic of him to leave without warning. They believe foul play may have been involved in his disappearance.
Authorities, however, think it more likely that Guimond was slightly intoxicated when he left the party, and that he stumbled into a body of water and drowned. They have searched several nearby lakes, but failed to come up with any evidence to support their theory.
Other theories are that Guimond took his own life or left of his own accord, but there is no evidence to support these hypotheses either. He and his girlfriend of nearly five years had broken up a month prior to his disappearance, but remained friends.
Guimond's ex-girlfriend said he is very intelligent and driven and hoped to go to law school after college. He was a member of his college's Republican organization and hoped to serve in the Minnesota House of Representatives someday. His family lives in Maple Lake, Minnesota. He remains missing and his case is unsolved."
I can't believe this -- going on 18 years now with no forward movement (that I can see) in this case. It is heartbreaking. Josh's Grandpa Bob died without ever getting any answers in spite of his relentness pursuit of the truth. He did everything he possibly could to find out what happened. I know there are others who have also spent many years examining Josh's case. It's like a puzzle with one big piece missing, and I think the answers contained in that missing piece can be found in the exact location from which Josh disappeared. I still maintain that, given the lengthy history of sexual abuse at St. John's, the sheriff should have immediately began questioning the monks' alibis for that night/morning. And of course the Abbot should have been as forthcoming, honest and truthful as possible. Was he?
The monks unfortunately weren't vetted properly the first week he went missing. But it's really not too late to figure out who was there and what they were doing.
I think it would have to be someone in an "official" capacity to ask those questions. And for all I know, maybe some of the monks have been questioned. But it just seems like -- that ship has sailed -- and quite possibly the perpetrator is now gone. Sometimes I wonder if perhaps a monk confessed to doing something awful (i.e criminal), the Abbot would state that the perpetrator's sin is forgiven and that's that. What would the Abbot do under oath? Probably claim some kind of religious immunity from having to reveal anything.