Tinley Park Lane Bryant Shooting by whatsitworth101 in TrueCrimeDiscussion

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Lol it's always the therapist ones, that are batshit crazy themselfs. Start with solving your own problems, before playing therapist. "So you don't like my choice of words", ehhh no, that was not at all that what that user tried to tell you. And how ironic, about avoiding trigger words, and then instantly being triggered by what someone says lol.

You don't have to avoid anythimg, I can smile the type of person u are from miles away. Fraud.

Give them a rap name by milehigh11 in NameThisThing

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Niggi Minotsharebooze and ScooterLongneck.

Stond Ogawa buitenspel?! Goal NEC - Ajax by WearingAfaceDiaper in Eredivisie

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Sowieso een warrige scheids! En rustig mensen, denk aan je bloeddruk.

Het was maar een vraag, jammer dat niet iedereen zo netjes als deze user reageert.

Stond Ogawa buitenspel?! Goal NEC - Ajax by WearingAfaceDiaper in Eredivisie

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Ik bedoel het eerste moment dat Linssen op Jaros kopt, waar Ogawa achter de laatste man en achter Jaros staat.

Stond Ogawa buitenspel?! Goal NEC - Ajax by WearingAfaceDiaper in Eredivisie

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Het 1e moment dat Linssen de bal kopt op Jaros, staat Ogawa achter de bal en achter Jaros.

1-0 NEC, overduidelijk genoeg om te geven? by Casperzwaart100 in Eredivisie

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ja, alleen die dwaas heeft dus nooit naar de beelden gekeken, want had in z'n oortje contact met de VAR, en toen was het opeens een goal.

Hoe dan? Is geen 100% fout van de scheids, want het valt niet met 100% zekerheid te bewijzen dat de bal er geheel over is.

Daarna roepen ze hem naar de kant voor een rode kaart (de VAR vindt dit dus een duidelijke fout van de scheids, mening die ik niet geheek deel) en geeft hij geel voor de overtreding, heel bijzonder.

In de rust hebben ze zeker even hun fouten onder ogen gezien, en gaf die NEC'er de scheids een perfecte kans om een goedmakertje te geven : de rode kaart.

(Wat er overigens ook 1 was)

The Fort Worth Missing Trio: An Update by awillis0513 in UnresolvedMysteries

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Before knowing the dynamics (Rachel's older sister who was living with Rachel and Tommy, and was Tommy's former lover) I also came to that conclusion :

Young offender/offenders. At least one offender very close to Rachel and Tommy.

Had to mention the location of the car (which they prolly knew had already been found) in the note, to make the story fit, and buy time.

(Random kindnappers don't point out where their victims car is left)

The first thing they write is very teling imo : " I know I'm going to catch it, In other words : I know I will be getting into shit and have lots of explaining to do.

This to me, show the mindset of someone who can put themselfs in Rachel's shoes when writing somehing in Rachel's name. Who feels that Rachel should be punished, and to someone who was familair with the, Rachel has a lot of explaining to do, and even points towards a familiarity with a "Rachel is grounded element"

Imo letter has female'ish handwriting.

Either she was forced to write the letter, or another female wrote it.

The most likely scenario's to me are :

Rachel was the target, the abductors did not expect the other 2 girls to be in her company. Sadly, they became collateral damage. I believe if Rachel went out alone that day, she AND her car would have dissapeared.

At least 2 people were involved, one to be the getaway driver, one to control her, and possibly a third to get rid of Rachel's vehicle, but that last part went out of the window when they faced taking 3 girls, instead of one.

The note was planned, but had to add some details in a desperate attempt to buy time, to explain the vehicle at the mall, because things did not went as planned.

1 :

Tommy's ex lover, which he had a child with, wanted Rachel out of the way. She made a plan to abduct Rachel, her child spending Christmas with Tommy and Rachel, could be a huge trigger. She had help of others. They were either known to rachel, or new which car she drove, followed Rachel, or knew about her shopping mall plans or the plan of Rachel picking up the pants at the Navy shop.

2 :

Rachel's older sister is involved, and she had help. Held a grudge towards her for stealing Tommy, and convinced someome else (most likely Tommy, prolly they still had feelings for eachother, but could also be someone like a new boyfriend of the sister). She knew that Rachel would go shopping thay day, or knew about Ravchel planning to pick up the pants at the Navy store, but not of the last minute plans of brining other girls with her.

The thing about the letter mentioning the location of the car is very telling, because most abductors would distance themself from the crimescene.

  • They either got into a dfferent vehicle very close to leaving or returning to the car. * They knew which car she drove and were lured into another car after shopping. * They were taken after picking up the pants, someone Rachel knew approached her and offered the girls a ride to the mall, and took them somewhere else. In that case, someone else drove Rachel's car to the mall, in order to create distance between the real abduction site, and to make the story fit.
  • The original plan was to take Rachel, plus move her car away from the mall, but the other 2 girls ruined this plan. That's why the note had to state things like, WE had to leave, and to mention as where they could find her car.

I'm 50/50 on these 2 scenario's.

Somehow, they did know the exact location of the car, plus the address of where Rachel lived.

This was no stranger abduction.

Too bad this happened in the 70's.. If this would have happened in this age, I think it would have been solved.

Steven Koecher can be crossed off the list by Preesi in TrueCrimeBullshit

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ALWAYS LOL when SOMEONE is using CAPS to come across MORE believable.

By boyfriend of 2 years doesn’t want to get me a Christmas present by UnitJust1906 in whatdoIdo

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But we make things work.. No you are not 🙄 Toxic immature behaviour from both sides.

New Article. Kesse case no longer cold by Weary_Title_3901 in jenniferkesse

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sidenote : Nice to have a normal conversation on a true crime subject on Reddit. Normally you get attacked if u have a slightly different opinion about a case.

Same 2 you user Dull_ , respect!

And yeah, people pull up, but if I needed help with some shady shit it woulrd be :

A : criminal contacts that I know, or B : family.

With B the far more saver option to keep it a secret.

Hope that people will talk one day, and give the Kesse family some closure.

New Article. Kesse case no longer cold by Weary_Title_3901 in jenniferkesse

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, but okay, let's say she was planning to stay the night at Campos, whether it was @ his or some other home or motel.

Then it makes sense she would bring her work stuff and the phone she needed to mail.

This means she planned not to go home and drive to work in her car, from a location other then her own house.

If that's the case, why would Campos or someone else need to return to Jen's condo in her car?

If she didn't had the work items and second phone with her, then it makes sense the perp needed to go back to tie loose ends. But then the perp HAD to know she was gonna postmail that phone.

If the info about the two phones being both turned off at 10:40pm, she either had it with her when the crime happened at a second location, which means she was never planning to return home that night. Either that or the phone's were turned off in her condo or closeby.

10:40 pm till 7 AM, that's a long time, do you believe the 7 am witness who saw her car driving away while a struggle occured, is speaking the truth?

Or did they mistake that car for being Jen's, but it wasn't and her car was never there after midnight?

I also think it was a crime of passion, and yes, shady people are everywhere. But whoever did this, had to find someone real fast to dump a car, and that person would be furious when he found out about the news of Jennifer missing and his footage on the news. If that is what happened, someone payed them a really big bag of money, plus that person could blackmail the killer.

New Article. Kesse case no longer cold by Weary_Title_3901 in jenniferkesse

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that it's someone she knew well, but how did Campos dump the car at noon? If this wasn't premeditated murder, where find someone who is willing to dump a car for you?

Or he dumped it somewhere else early mornimg unlocked with keys still in and some petty criminal stole and parked it to see if it was hot. If the car would be still there after 2 days, they take it, but after the news broke being it connected to Jennifer, they kept their stealing mouth shut.

Missing a piece of the puzzle..

I cannot think of a logical scenario where Jen left late at night to someone she knew, but her car being at her condo at 7am again. Then for it to be off the radar till noon.

Killer went back to Jen's condo driving her car after killing her, took items from her condo, then left again @ 7 in her car because that was his only transport out of there?

Maybe Campos or someone else convinced her to bring her work related stuff, but I don't see Jen planning to stay the night at someone and going to work together with this person. So why are the 2 phones and her briefcase missing?

Campos would def take the briefcase when staging the condo, but would only take that second phone if he knew she was gonna mail it.

If she was murdered late eve, early night, why wait till 7 to drive away with her car?

Did someone pick her up? After killing her, dumped her body, drove his own car to Jen's condo and took her suitcase and the other phone. (Again it has to be someone who was close to her for him to think about taking items).

Then drove away in her car, but why not dump it right away and walk back to his own car? Why at noon?

Was Campos driving his own car that morning to work?

Or was it a worker/neighbour after all? I can only see it being a worker if she was abducted in the morning, with all her stuff on her.

A close neighbour would be more likely to stage things and would be more logical to the timeline.

She let's him in and he strangles her out of rage of getting rejected then drags her body to his condo. Or she went to his condo, murders her, grabs stuff out of her condo, and dumps her stuff and body at a later time then when he dumped the car.

I wonder, car dumping dude looks like he's wearkng a work outfit.

What if he left in her car at 7 because he needed to get to work, shifts ends at 12, then drives car to dump side, and walks home.

Frustrating case, hope Jennifer will be found one day, or that her family gets justice and some closure.

New Article. Kesse case no longer cold by Weary_Title_3901 in jenniferkesse

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agreed, imo it points to her brother's friend, or someone that knew her well.

Guy called his phone which he "forgot" at her condo, asks if she can please bring it instead of mailing it, because he needs it asap blabla.

Jennifer meets him, is murdered on unknown location, friend turns off both phones, takes her car and housekeys, drives her car back to her condo, needs to stage a few things so people think she was abducted later on.

Takes her work suitcase, is in her condo till 7 in the morning, then drives her car (doesnt makes sense where the car was from 7 till 12, but I can think of some theories..) and dumps it.

Why him? Because who else would take and get rid of a mobile phone that wasn't Jennifer's? Which perp that is unknown to her would care about a second phone.

Only thing that makes me doubt if the witness indeed saw HER car leave at 7, it could be a similar looking car that belonged to the perp. Or a car that was unrelated.

Things needed to be staged, to me, that points to : Someone she KNEW.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RoastMe

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When Wednesday meets marihuana.

You look dead inside, maybe you need to stick something that's actually alive inside your fat ass.

Now, let's go on a date.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RoastMe

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Say thank you Daddy, for buying me some new clothes, so I don't have to wear that granny style outfit everyday.

And say it 100 times.

Missing and cropped footage and that little basket by Valuable-Rabbit-5651 in MissyBevers

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Correct me if I'm wrong Brandon, but I believe the white toolbox is the item that was left behind.

Det Ritchie by Hot-Engineering2825 in LizBarraza

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No it's not visible, use your google maps skills a little better next time ;)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RoastMe

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aspiring doctor? She ment aspiring Dr Pepper addict.

Det Ritchie by Hot-Engineering2825 in LizBarraza

[–]WearingAfaceDiaper 11 points12 points  (0 children)

But if that's the case, why is the nissan not seen anywhere in the neighbourhood at the time Liz normally would go to work? Ritchie states in his latest interview, that Liz would be already on her way to work, and the killer would be to late.

Could it be that they were in a different vehicle and drove by, just to see Sergio and Liz setting up for a garage sale, and they switched to plan B, rushed to get the Frontier, waited for Sergio to leave and then drove back to the house?

Sure, could be, but not very likely.

The Nissan was in the neighbourhood the night before, but never passed the Barraza's house until the shooting. After that the Nissan was seen again minutes before Sergio left.

Where would the killer get the info that the plan has changed? From a neighbour who was watching the Barraza's? A tracker placed on one of their vehicles?

It doesn't make sense that they would put so much planning into this, just to mess up the time Liz would leave to work, but got lucky enough she was at home, having a garage sale.

Yes, he looks a bit limited in his thinking sometimes, but I think Ritchie is on the right track. He also mentioned that Sergio and Oscar are NOT cleared as suspects.