Motivation

Posted by joy.the.curious on May 1, 2013 in Jacob | 8 comments

New here? Start from the beginning…

Jacob’s abduction is a mystery on so many levels. To be sure, there have been many red herrings over the years… pedophile priests, skulkers at the Tom Thumb, bald men in white work vans, confessions by wanna-be celebrities… but, my great hope in all of this is that maybe it’s not such a mystery after all. Maybe we’re all just making it too complicated. Maybe if we could just stick to the facts, we could uncover some useful little tidbit that somehow got overlooked in years past.

I was watching Parks and Recreation the other night (a show I’ve maybe seen once before). One of the characters said something like, “There are only three ways to motivate people… money, fear and hunger.”

And I thought to myself… huh. Money, fear, and hunger. I wonder if that’s true?

It got me thinking… why would someone take a child? More specifically, what motivates a pedophile to ABDUCT a child vs. the more typical scenario of building a relationship with them first, then taking advantage of them.

I decided to Google it:

motivation – abduct – child

My Google search yielded a 112 page report put out by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children called Child Molesters Who Abduct: Summary of the Case in Point Series. It’s dated March 1995, so I realize there may be more recent information out there. However, because this document was written only six years after Jacob was abducted, maybe this information is actually even more relevant to this particular case.

Child Molesters Who Abduct Children

467KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

This study was conducted at the Massachusetts Treatment Center (MTC) and was based on 157 offenders: 97 abductors and 60 nonabductors. Take a look at the following table which shows the primary differences between these two subtypes:

Based on this information, we can make a few logical assumptions based on the type of person who took Jacob.

• He has a high sexual pre-occupation with children, meaning he probably has a history of watching/reading/collecting various types of kiddie porn.

• He has low social competence. This person seems just a little “off” to the average person.

• He has a low amount of contact with children. Combine that with his low social skills, and it’s easy to see why this person would have to resort to ABDUCTING a child vs. enticing and manipulating them.

• In this study, 63% of the abductors used a weapon to intimidate their victims. Again, taking into account the abductor’s low social skills and inexperience with children, he probably wouldn’t want to take any chances that the child might resist.

• He was most likely a victim of sexual assault himself.

• He has never been married.

So, using these statistics, we are starting to build a profile of the person who may have taken Jacob.

To me, the three most important pieces of information from Aaron’s and Trevor’s eyewitness testimony are:

1. The abductor had a gun (or said he had a gun)
2. The abductor was wearing a mask (presumably so he couldn’t be recognized)
3. The abductor asked the children’s ages (not their names)

When I spoke with the Wetterlings a few weeks ago, I specifically asked them about the mask. In a Minneapolis Star Tribune article dated two days after the abduction, Trevor said, “He had a mask; it looked like pantyhose, on his head.” On the other hand, I’ve read other accounts where it was described as a ski mask. Patty Wetterling told me they just don’t know for sure. It was so dark, the boys couldn’t really see, but Trevor thought it may have been a pair of nylons because he remembers seeing something bunched up and dangling behind the abductor’s neck (like the rest of the nylons). But, who knows. Maybe it was a hood, or even long hair. (It was the 80s after all, maybe it was a mullet.)

I encourage you to download and read the report I referenced above. At the end of the report, there are several case studies about these child molestors who abduct. Most telling, I think, are the “Significant Life Events” section at the end of each of these case studies. This really gives us a clear picture of who these people are who abduct children for sex.

Now, using this info, we can ask ourselves who also exhibited these traits, lived in or near the St. Joseph area, owned or had access to a late-70s model tan/amber Monte Carlo-type sedan, and had the ability to drive it with the talent and precision of a stunt car driver?

Hmmm…

Finally, in my last post, I said I would answer a few more questions left by Commenters. Here are a few:

Q. Why hasn’t Kevin’s girlfriend come forward to tell her story? It seems that she should do so. She may remember something that Kevin does not.

A. Kevin’s girlfriend hasn’t been willing to speak with me directly, but she DID actually contribute to this story. Through a relative, she did tell me the make and model of her car (the one Kevin was driving when he left his tire tracks). It was an Oldsmobile Grand Prix. I’m hopeful that she may still talk to me, now that she’s had a chance to read my blog and evaluate my intentions. However, that is yet to be seen. One can only hope.

Q. I think a real key to the case is the assault on Jared that has such stong similarities to Jacob’s abduction. Have you considered interviewing him?

A. Yes, I have considered interviewing Jared. I do know who he is, but am respecting his privacy in the hopes he will contact me if and when he is ready. Time will tell.

Q. Does Patty know for certain which type of gun was used? And, furthermore, were Trevor and Aaron sure it was a gun or could it have simply been something “shiny” that looked like a gun?

A. From everything I’ve read, it was a handgun… not a shot gun, and not a knife. I will try and verify this.

Q. There have been several versions told detailing how Jacob was “selected” by the kidnapper. A definite, specific step by step accounting of how he was chosen is the most critical factor in this case in my opinion. I believe it was Trevor that the abductor first asked for his age? Did he order Trevor to the woods immediately after learning his age?? Or, did the kidnapper release both Trevor and Aaron only after asking all the boys’ ages? Also, once the kidnapper knew Aaron’s age, did he only look at Aaron’s face? Or did he look at both Aaron and Jacob’s face? The order in which all of this happened, especially the specific points at which each boy was ordered to run to the woods, would be very telling as to whether Jacob was selected from among the 3 boys, or whether he had been targeted all along.

A. The abductor told all three boys to lie down in the ditch, face down. He asked all three of them their ages, then grabbed Trevor (Jacob’s younger brother) and told him to run toward the woods (straight west, across the field), and not to look back or he’d shoot. Next, the abductor turned Aaron and Jacob over, looked at their faces, and told Aaron the same thing… run toward the woods and don’t look back or he’d shoot. Aaron took off running toward the woods and caught up to Trevor pretty quickly. When they turned around to look back, they couldn’t see the abductor or Jacob. (Keep in mind, it was a dark, moonless night, and the distance to the tree line was about a city block from the ditch/road.)

Q. Would Kevin be able to pinpoint exactly where the “new” cop was parked on one of these photos?

A. The cop was parked at Cotton’s dental office. I will verify this with Kevin, but assuming it’s in the same spot as the current location, the address would be 1514 East Minnesota Street.

[UPDATE: I did verify that Cotton’s dental office is still in the same spot as it was in 1989. However, the name has now changed to Cotton & Styles Dental Office. Also, Dan Rassier replied to let me know that even though the address was correct in my previous post (1514 East Minnesota Street in St. Joseph), the location on Google Maps was wrong. The dental office is (and was) on the corner of 16th Avenue and County Highway 75. (Also, in case there’s any confusion, 91st Avenue was renamed to 16th Avenue in the time since Jacob’s abduction.)]

Next time

A Stunner in Cleveland

8 Comments

1. ELOCsoul | May 7, 2013 at 6:01 am

   Thanks for the information regarding Cotton & Styles Dental Office. That would appear to be a logical location for law enforcement to set up surveillance for anyone leaving the area. However, I’m still baffled that LE didn’t secure the crime scene by this time, and that the officer failed to report speaking to Kevin. That info could have made all the difference in the world in solving the case within days.

2. Brian | May 11, 2013 at 2:52 am

   Have the kids who were freed described the voice of the abductor? Any accents or strange speech patterns? Doesn’t sound like much was said and it was probably distorted by the mask, but it would be a way to distinguish a visitor vs a local.

3. Lotus | May 14, 2013 at 12:23 pm

   I always thought that (after letting Trevor go) the kidnapper questioned Jacob & Aaron together (asking their ages, studying each of their faces) before deciding on Jacob and letting Aaron go…

4. suzanne Shefveland | May 15, 2013 at 5:45 am

   It is a known local fact that SJU hides pedophile priests there. How much were they looked @ and their backgrounds? I lived in St. Joe 13yr a few blocks away and had never been on that road. I believe it was used only by people who lived on that road so the abductor had to know that area of town. My children were affected by this horrific act and I will never forget it. We knew the Wetterlings. They are great people.

5. Jbrown | May 16, 2013 at 1:30 pm

   Suzanne, I completely agree. There are “retired” priests who have done unspeakable crimes to children who are no being properly supervised. They are allowed to come and go as they please. They go to bars in Minneapolis and brag about people they pick up. They could have easily driven off campus, picked Jacob up and done something with him.

   I don’t believe the sheriff ever interviewed the priests because a) it’s a priest, you are supposed to respect them b) St John’s pays a big part of their salary and the current sheriff graduated there and his son graduated there. They could have invisible strings everywhere. I know one priest threatened to kick one college student out of school if he told anyone about the sexual abuse he endured.

6. Clarence | May 26, 2013 at 9:20 am

   Without sounding hypercritical of all the honest and concerned bloggers on your site they seem to be going over the top to the other side of the never-never?Is it possible this dude that was seen in the Tom Thumb convenience store, assuming it was the same guy, might have been a set up man to do a lot of pre-planning and foot work to abduct these kids? For the most part he stayed out of it and let the people do the real dirty work? Most likely an out-of-towner, someone you probably might never see again?

7. CK | May 13, 2014 at 3:05 pm

   Oldsmobile did not make the Grand Prix: Pontiac did. If you look at the Grand Prix and the Monte Carlo side by side they look very similar.

8. Rick | May 14, 2014 at 10:10 am

   CK, you are correct about the disparity with the Grand Prix. Oldsmobile made the Cutlass in various trims at the time as well as the 442. Both of these could be mistaken for a Grand Prix or Monte Carlo. My question is just how certain are they about the year? The Monte Carlos underwent some fairly significant body changes between 1980 and 1985. The early ones particularly were known for two-tone paint schemes between fenders/side panels and the rest of the vehicle.