Where do we go from here?

The original SMS at 00:49 A.M.:
"Coming later. The game was funny not against England :) Lyvm* see you later".

*Love you very much

The state police and the witnesses regard this SMS as authentic to be written by the victim herself. This would imply that she was voluntarily out of town and wanted to inform her roommate that everything was ok, when she wrote that message. Shortly after that, the situation changed. The guy who was with her maybe tried to convince her to have sex and as she refused he assaulted her. He raped her and afterwards he is undecided what to do next. He had not planned to kill anybody but he can't let her go either. He comes up with the idea taking her hostage and hiding her until he figured something out. The photo on the left shows the center of the radio cell where the text message has been sent. the village in the middle of it is called Nieheim and has 6595 inhabitants. The diameter of the radio cell is 15 kilometres. The strange name Nieheim can be translated as "Neverhome", although we consider this to be a coincidence. Around the village there are several small settlements each with around a few hundred inhabitants.

The killers home

To make the decision not to kill Frauke after abusing her, requires a certain infrastructure the killer must have in place. There are hundreds of small farm buildings in that area, some of them even with their own roads, like you see on the example photo on the left. If the killer lives in such a place, the decision not to kill her right away could be relatively easy. It would be even more easy for him, if he lived there alone with no witnesses around.
His behavior towards his victim ranged from friendly to abusive and ended in killing her. Although we don't know yet, how he managed to get Frauke in his car and the voluntariness of the text message is not proven. His character, his appearance could exclude him from the start to get in contact with a girl like Frauke in a normal way. Photoshop and Tinder hadn't been used back then, lol. To conclude it's still very speculative to say anything determinative about the killer. But there were two people involved in this, right?! What can Frauke's behavior tell us about the perpetrator?

Frauke's behavior over the time

I don't know if that's the right term: behavior. All we got is phone calls and text messages. But there is a hope that we find changes in the way she answers and texts. First thing to notice is that Frauke didn't answer a single question on phone before 68 hours after the abduction. And this is only because her brother called her while she was sending a SMS.
It was Friday, 11:06 p.m.. She sounded sober.
Frank: "Frauke, what are you doing, when are you coming home?"
Frauke: "I'll be home today, not too late either. I'm in Paderborn, don't ask, I'll be home."
Frank: "Where are you?"
Frauke: "I can't say."
And then hung up. This was the point when the perpetrator, who was with her, first builds some kind of trust in her, that she won't betray him.
Only 15 hours later she calls her roommate.
 Frauke: "I won't be back that late. Coming home tonight."
Chris: "Are you hurt?"
Frauke: "No. I'm in Paderborn. I'm in Paderborn. I'm in Paderborn."
The three times mentioning Paderborn is remarkable. It could be a hint. If you take the first letters of what she said, you get IBIP. This is an association based in Bremen. Their goal is to integrate impaired people into the job market. So the killer could be impaired and worked in a facility where the victim worked as well.

32 hours later

Frauke: "Coming home today."
Chris: "Are you in danger?
Frauke: "No."
Chris: "Why didn't you come home yesterday?"
Frauke: "I can explain."
Chris: "Where are you?"
Frauke: "I'll explain when I get home." 
Hung up. The killer has tightened the rules again. He waits 32 hours with the call and wants no place to be mentioned. While Frauke works desperately to find a way out of this situation by negotiating with this nut job. The two times using the term "explain" on two different questions, could be her indicating that she is the mastermind in the room. Otherwise it could also be the result of excessive drug use.
49 hours later.
Karen: "Come back!"
Frauke: "It's not possible, I'm still alive!"
The entire phone call lasted 5 minutes. The killer let her talk with two persons. At this point he had reached his goal, he imposed his will on her. She does what he wants. Mission accomplished. After that she becomes irrelevant for him. He's going to move on with his pathetic life. Maybe he even forgets about her and finds her a week later, suffocated, smelling. His former favorite toy is now decomposing.

What are the takeaways?

The perpetrator's actions are characterized by a sociopathic nature. He is used to physical violence since childhood. He probably has a history of committing violent crimes as well. The sexual aspect of it is somehow new to him. He experiments with it. The victim is not seen by him as an equivalent individual, but as an inferior object. Although it's possible that some kind of traumatic events could have caused him to act that way, it is also likely that his actions are based on a congenital disability. The exposure to violence he experienced in his early life is likely to have happened in his family environment. This could be an abusive father as well as an abusive mother. There is a strong, sometimes exaggerated need to be in a powerful position compared to his victim. This indicates the lack of self-esteem and the lack of power in real life the perpetrator suffers from.

How did he get her in the car?

We have to speculate on this. Based on the given facts, it is most likely that the perpetrator and his victim have never met each other before that night. This is not only because they come from total different social backgrounds. She, a nicely looking, well educated woman in her early 20's, he, probably an old, ugly loser by chance, struggling to survive. Two opposites. But also because of the actions the perpetrator made during the 5 days, the crime went on, it is obvious, that he knew nothing about her from the beginning.
A forceful kidnapping seems unlikely, because witnesses could have seen something. She is not the type to get herself talked into getting in the car of a total stranger. So this doesn't sum up. Unless there are certain tools used at this early stage of the crime: Knockout-drops given to her while she was still in the pub. So if we believe that the place she was held, is somewhere close to Nieheim, it had to be a visitor from the pub.
I've been in such bars, when they showed games on a big screen. It is easy to watch people even to steal their purse, because they all focus on the screen. Her girlfriend mentioned, that Frauke yawned a lot. This happens also, if you've been given an overdose of GBL, called liquid ecstasy. Minutes after that you fall asleep. If you want to know more, visit the guys from the forensics.

Mobirise web builder - Details here