TN - Holly Bobo, 20, Darden, believed abducted 13 April 2011 - #30

[~n/t~]

Clu.....look what I found. You posted this back in April. Do you remember where you got the word relieved? lol

cluciano6304-25-2011, 09:38 PM
Did anyone have a quote that indicated that Holly was likely to be alive, from whatever was most recently found? I had not seen anything like that, only that her family was relieved that the item was found, and that LE felt it might lead to a breakthrough.

I gathered that they were glad something new was found partly because the search was starting to be in the winding down stage and it gave it new life, and also because it could lead to more clues, but I have read a lot of posts that thought it indicated she was alive and wondered if I missed a video, thanks.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-134400.html

 

[~n/t~]

Back in April.....the piece of evidence that was found that gave everyone hope and possible game changer.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2011/04/25/exp.nr.gwyn.bobo.case.cnn?iref=allsearch

 

[cluciano63]

Clu.....look what I found. You posted this back in April. Do you remember where you got the word relieved? lol




http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-134400.html

I probably saw it on another board...and now it keeps popping up...I read two other forums about Holly and know I have seen it there. Yet no source for it...I'm going to assume that at most, she may have been relieved that a new find would probably mean the searches would continue, (although they didn't, did they?) JMO.

 

[Frogzilla]

My opinions only, no facts here:

Frogzilla, I still slightly favor the possibility that Holly will be found within a couple of miles of her house. But to be fair, my second choice would be removal entirely from the local area. Something I mentioned in a much earlier post was the risk that the perpetrator could be involved with the public searches. This would, of course, bring discovered evidence into question.

It is hard for me to conjure up a scenario where the abductor killed her as he was making his escape, especially so close to her house. That would mean he did not waste any time after taking her and actually took her items with him. Consider the angle that he knows CB saw him and then consider the angle he didn't think CB saw him. Does he take her into the woods and stop to do his deed, or does he try to reach a safe spot ASAP? Even if he killed her shortly after the abduction, he would still be escaping the area with evidence on him. What is to be gained? I have a hard time seeing it that way. Especially after 8 months and knowing the area around her home has been searched and researched with a fine tooth comb.
I find it much more probable she was hidden on private property or in some of the unusual terrain in the area, such as caves or crevasses or somewhere far from her home. Doesn't it just click more if his focus was on getting HB into a secure place and then worry about everything else? Also, if the intention was just to kill her, why didn't he just do it at the home? Why the need to spend 10 minutes or so with her? Why the need to forcibly remove her? Why the need to even abduct her at that point. It shows there were other motivating factors IMO.
In regards to the perp possibly being in on searches, I see that as a possibility too. What also concerns me is you could look at the known finds as being planted without even considering the perp was involved in searching. This case soooooo reeks of having locals involved.
The conundrum from your other post is worth examining IMO. The way I tend to view it is that HB had a set schedule to most of her life. We have been told she was a homebody, spent most of her time with her family and BF, had a smaller very close group of friends, very active in her church, worked part time and attended school full time. I assume the abductor was aware of most of this and decided that ambushing her at home was the most sure way to get her to himself because most of her time is spent around others, not to many gaps in her schedule it seems. If CB was not home, and we have been told he was usually not home at that time, then it all falls into place. The abductor probably thought he had X amount of time with her before he had to make his move and his plans may have been accelerated. This is where I think most of us can agree on the panic angle maybe playing a factor, whether or not we can generally agree to probable outcomes, or even consider some alternatives.

 

[Carla Lashelle]

Websleuths is about triumph, not silence or despair. We speculate because the crimes are unsolved and require speculation and because we wish to be triumphant. But I do not disagree with your scenario. I analyze cases in terms of the mathematical probabilities. It is possible that the perpetrator was panicked and behaved irrationally. It is slightly more probable that the perpetrator had a method behind their madness. I have considered that the crime was totally unplanned, just a hunter passing through the woods. Also possible, but not as probable as a planned event. Yes, this crime occurred in broad daylight, but broad daylight also coincides with when Holly is leaving the house for her car.

It is possible that the perpetrator knew her schedule, thought she was alone at home, but apparently did not break into the house where a crime could have been committed out-of-sight. This puzzles me. If you know her brother is at home, you do not even attempt the crime. If you believe her brother is not at home, you do not hang around outside the house for 10 minutes, you go inside. Any ideas regarding this conundrum?

I believe the suspect did observe Holly and/or the house at some point. The fact that LE searched around the driveway to Holly's school (and IIRC some item may have been found) indicates perhaps someone was waiting or watching there. Perhaps LE found similar items near the house like a cigarette butt, discarded item, etc. that someone watching, and waiting may have left in both places?

Of course if someone were watching then it is not random. So the idea of a hunter just happening to find Holly in the short distance between her door and car at the precise moment she was leaving is not plausible. If it were a random hunter, who may have walked for miles to get to the house randomly, how would he get away with Holly so quickly? So I do not really think it was some random hunter, etc.

I think the suspect may not have known Clint was at home. Evidence may point to this. There was the scream outside, yet the suspect did not leave then. Clint woke up and heard voices OUTSIDE. Then the voices and people were in the garage. To me that indicates the suspect was taking Holly back into the house or part of the house. You would probably not do that if you thought someone was at home. I suspect that the barking dog and Clint looking into the garage spooked the suspect. And that, when Clint left that part of the house to call his mom (according to his story) the suspect ushered Holly away.

Since so many details are sketchy there are some things to consider.... we know the blood was found in the garage. Clint was clear about this, and the location is where Clint saw Holly and the suspect kneeling. Could there have been additional blood by her car as some reports have indicated (although not directly from Clint)? That would also correspond to some reports describing blood being found in more than one area/across areas. Don't know. So perhaps Holly was assaulted outside, then led inside where she dribbled some more blood. If she were stunned that would explain the lack of further noise from Holly and her compliance. The part about her walking away, while somewhat vague, does make sense if someone was very scared, hurt, and/or being threatened.

We do not know what items Holly may have left back at the house. People assume she carried away a ton of stuff but what she had or didn't have has never been confirmed aside from the lunch bag. The lunch bag may have had a handle or strap that was over Holly's shoulder. That would mean she just walked away with the bag versus stopping to take it off. That is not unusual, to me. It makes more sense than someone carrying it for her. At some point in the suspect's vehicle the bag was removed and tossed out the window.

 

[Carla Lashelle]

It is hard for me to conjure up a scenario where the abductor killed her as he was making his escape, especially so close to her house. That would mean he did not waste any time after taking her and actually took her items with him. Consider the angle that he knows CB saw him and then consider the angle he didn't think CB saw him. Does he take her into the woods and stop to do his deed, or does he try to reach a safe spot ASAP? Even if he killed her shortly after the abduction, he would still be escaping the area with evidence on him. What is to be gained? I have a hard time seeing it that way. Especially after 8 months and knowing the area around her home has been searched and researched with a fine tooth comb.
I find it much more probable she was hidden on private property or in some of the unusual terrain in the area, such as caves or crevasses or somewhere far from her home. Doesn't it just click more if his focus was on getting HB into a secure place and then worry about everything else? Also, if the intention was just to kill her, why didn't he just do it at the home? Why the need to spend 10 minutes or so with her? Why the need to forcibly remove her? Why the need to even abduct her at that point. It shows there were other motivating factors IMO.
In regards to the perp possibly being in on searches, I see that as a possibility too. What also concerns me is you could look at the known finds as being planted without even considering the perp was involved in searching. This case soooooo reeks of having locals involved.
The conundrum from your other post is worth examining IMO. The way I tend to view it is that HB had a set schedule to most of her life. We have been told she was a homebody, spent most of her time with her family and BF, had a smaller very close group of friends, very active in her church, worked part time and attended school full time. I assume the abductor was aware of most of this and decided that ambushing her at home was the most sure way to get her to himself because most of her time is spent around others, not to many gaps in her schedule it seems. If CB was not home, and we have been told he was usually not home at that time, then it all falls into place. The abductor probably thought he had X amount of time with her before he had to make his move and his plans may have been accelerated. This is where I think most of us can agree on the panic angle maybe playing a factor, whether or not we can generally agree to probable outcomes, or even consider some alternatives.

Based on my assumption that this was a prepared crime, it is logical to assume that the suspect had prepared something to do with Holly after the abduction. I have always sort of felt this was a lust/sexual assault kind of crime and that Holly was the intended target.

I do not think Holly was killed right away as then the suspect would have to carry her body around and that makes things ten times harder. People are heavy and awkward to carry, especially dead ones. Even forcing Holly to walk unwillingly or slowly away with him would be faster than carrying her.

I assume at some point within the first day or so Holly was killed and somehow disposed of. She could be in anyone's back yard. As long as police did not have a particular reason to search there or to obtain a warrant to search there, they would not and could not look. Of course she could have been disposed of some distance away. You can drive a long way on the interstate in 90 minutes.

We know too from the Casey Anthony case that people can and do hide bodies in the trunk of a car for a while. The suspect could have easily hid Holly for a day or two or three until he got to where he was going with her for disposal. In the Anthony case the body in the car became known only after the abandoned car was towed away...

I am not sure of any great panic on the part of the suspect. He may have been excited or thrilled for all we know. He does not seem to have made panic-induced mistakes (except perhaps dumping items around randomly?). But we really do not know very much.

When my sister and I were assaulted in our home by a stalker who was only somewhat known to us. I found out later that he had gotten our address easily from one of the cabs we took home from work nightly or nearly nightly. He already knew where we worked, had some idea of our schedule, then knew where we lived. I do not believe he spent a lot of time planning his crime after he got the info he needed... but getting some of that info and putting it all together probably took a day or two to a week?

 

[Wonless]

This is all an exercise in speculation, if there wasn't any all we would see are reposts of the FBI poster. There probably isn't enough factual information available in this case to rule out Elmer Fudd or Bugs Bunny.
I like to see any and all ideas brought forward and in the process people will generally accept or refute ideas. If somebody refutes your idea, ignore them or keep a dialogue with them to see what fits and what does not. I like to present theories and alternatives, especially when a theory has an obvious flip side or when a theory has many unanswered questions and no conclusions to draw from.
In regards to your post, actually that is exactly what I am saying. My whole point was that you can form big picture scenarios with one version, the other version requires looking at puzzle pieces without being able to see any kind of full picture. As in, oh I think they found x item here and y item there, I guess that is the path the abductor took (if it wasn't and it didn't lead you to his doorstep, where do you go from there? Why weren't her items found together? What motivation would there be to scatter items as you are leaving?) Those are just a few of the questions that would need plausible reasons for me to move forward progressing that type of theory. When I ask myself those types of questions, I seem to keep coming back to planted evidence being able to answer most of them, so that in turn leads to a whole other side of theories. The only answer provided so far in our exchanges is that the perp was possibly scared and panicked. It is a possibility, but it leads to other questions. The abductor has the nerve to ambush and forcibly remove a young woman from her home, but then panics when he has her to himself? How does this panic relate to scattering items? Does he dig through her lunchbag/purse and pick out one item and toss it as he goes along? Is it possible this same type of panic could cause somebody to rush their plan and feel the need to misdirect after the fact?
Also, trying to deflect is the sign of a weak argument. I am not trying to pick a fight, but your theory has the abductor within miles of HB home driving around the area almost 20 minutes after the abduction, I am not exactly sure what form or function that would be derived from. That is some very serious panic.

Ok, so I understand, you think the evidence was planted. I don't. Cool. But the fact is that HB and her abductor where doing something 20 minutes after the abduction. Looks to me like there are 3 choice, they where ethier in the woods (hiding, walking, or on an all terrian vehicle), or they where allready at a nearby final destination, or in a vehicle leaving the crime scene by public highway. IMO the first one seems unlikely, I think it would be very hard to get HB to go far enough to not be followed by dog, or get caught. The 2 is more likely than the first in my opinion, and the planting of evidence and the taunting of LE would fit that, but IMO I think they would have solved this kind of thing by now if it happened that way. Its just to small of a fishbowl, for this type not to have gotten caught. BTK had this kind of motive, but that was in a much bigger fishbowl. The 3rd is IMO the most likely. I don't understand how you come to the conclusion that anyone could paln this kind of thing so closely that they wouldn't be scared getting away. For one thing, he was seen, which Im sure he didn't plan. If holly didn't straight up tell him her brother was home, Im sure KB and CB and maybe LE where calling her cell phone, which the abductor would probably have known. I mean the abductor obviously didn't lose his head, he walked away and didn't run, but I can't believe that he was stone cold either..I mean he would have to be non human to have committed a crime like that and not be at least somewhat paniced during the getaway. I don't have any reasons, proof, or inside info, except that I can imagine his escape going exactly as I posted..he had to get out of the area, and he isn't going to throw a lunch bag or whatever out the window on a busy highway and risk getting noticed, but he needed to get rid of the phone, and that would be alot less noticable to throw out the window than a lunch bag and harder to spot. Anyone sees that Lunch bag 20 mins after the crime on the side of the road, the chase is one..to risky. He also couldn't risk getting stopped with the lunchbag or HB in the front seat, so he would probably have to stop in a quite, remote place for that. That's my "evidence". Stop worring about hurting my feelings. I promise I won't cry if you don't agree with me. I think what your theory is possible, I just can't picture it happening that way.

 

[bessie]

Please continue here...

TN - Holly Bobo, 20 Darden, believed abducted 13 April 2011 - #31 Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community