Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 #16

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just a random thought.We don't know exactly who entered the house first once Mollie was known to be missing. Going off early reports it may have been Family or JD since it was never reported as to whether the house was locked or unlocked. It was reported early in there was no sign of a struggle and items left. How do we know for sure the house wasn't a crime scene. There may have been time for a clean up. I'm sure there would have been a forensic team there at some point. IIRC a reporter asked the question re:house but LE dodged around it.
 
My very first gut instinct to this case was suicide. So little evidence. The hardest people to find are those who don’t want to be found. I’m still not ruling it out. Yes, she seemed like a happy girl with a lot of exciting things going on in her life currently, but don’t we say that about a lot of people that take their own lives? Just saying...

If she killed herself, I would look in a well or a septic system or somewhere where she couldn't be found....since she is still lost. But I'd only give 5% change of suicide.
 
Look at Jennifer Huston in Oregon. Suburban mom /wife with two little boys. She got in her car one evening; CCTV shows her at Walgreens, purchasing a snack. She stopped to get gas, also on CCTV. Then she gets into her Lexus, and disappears. Found hanging on a farmer's property, 25 miles away. The case was covered in national media.

Suicide is not predictable. Some people have suicidal ideation for a long time, without acting on it. Then, one event pushes them over the edge, and they act. Happened in my family.
 
I'm thinking there is a tactic as to why.
I'm also wondering why he hasn't lawyered up at this point?
I've also wondered why he didn't throw those holey shorts away!
I don’t know about tactics. Probably. But I wouldn’t have a lawyer in his position either. I can’t afford one and if I was innocent I wouldn’t mortgage my family’s future to pay for one. And I have a pair of shorts that have holes in them. They are really comfy.
 
Why does the public need to know right now?

I really don't get this. These investigations are delicate. They often involve numerous interviews of suspects who LE carefully cultivate relationships with in order to gain info. How would publicizing that they feel Mollie was the victim of foul play help with that at this stage?

Here's what I wrote previously:

If they are trying to make a perp feel comfortable and that they aren't looking to charge him or her with anything, then they may not say "foul play". That is a loaded term psychologically speaking. I've seen several "interrogations" where they convince the perp that they're on their side, that things can happen "accidentally", that they know the person didn't mean to do anything wrong, etc. Using the words "foul play" can ruin that flow.

I'm sorry. I trust the pros to know more than people on the internet. You have hundreds of highly qualified LE from State and federal agencies involved. They appear to be in consensus. The family is praising their efforts. Yet people continually demand to be in the middle of their investigation.

That baffles me.

To me - rule #1 is to find MT - anything that LE think will lead to that - we're entrusting them to do.

However - if LE wants to hold a PC - and asks for the publics help - then it may increase/speed up their progress to share something.
 
Why does the public need to know right now?

I really don't get this. These investigations are delicate. They often involve numerous interviews of suspects who LE carefully cultivate relationships with in order to gain info. How would publicizing that they feel Mollie was the victim of foul play help with that at this stage?

Here's what I wrote previously:

If they are trying to make a perp feel comfortable and that they aren't looking to charge him or her with anything, then they may not say "foul play". That is a loaded term psychologically speaking. I've seen several "interrogations" where they convince the perp that they're on their side, that things can happen "accidentally", that they know the person didn't mean to do anything wrong, etc. Using the words "foul play" can ruin that flow.

I'm sorry. I trust the pros to know more than people on the internet. You have hundreds of highly qualified LE from State and federal agencies involved. They appear to be in consensus. The family is praising their efforts. Yet people continually demand to be in the middle of their investigation.

That baffles me.
I think people want to get something when they give something. If they only get a little it renews their passion and curiosity and drive to help.
 
@ liz b long time no see!!! hi!!! it's me the pesky wabbit!

i agree with mr obvious. and fwiw, whatever "strategy" LE is employing it quite frankly isn't working.

also perhaps the presser was moved simply due to re-shuffling of power between winker and rahm...having nothing to do with the case itself...maybe...JMO...

People said the very same thing in the Kaytlynn Cargill case. Just howling about how incompetent and stupid LE was for not releasing info. How the case was cold. They didn't know what they were doing. They needed to involve the public. It was almost immediate.

An arrest came three months later. Oh they knew what they were doing. All along.

By the way? The police in that case also said:

"Kaytlynn Cargill, 14, is listed as a missing person, but detectives say they do not believe that she is in any danger or was abducted."

They had found loads of blood spatter in the suspect's home by the time they made that statement.
 
I just have hard time thinking she was abducted. She could easily run into the weeds or cornfields if need be. There are two cases on here where joggers were shot randomly with a gun. I dont see mollie getting in a car just because a gun was pointed at her.

We really can't know how she, or even we, would react. We think we know what we would do based on academic understanding that running and refusing to be coerced into a car likely offers the best opportunity to survive, and I hope I respond that way if, God forbid, I'm ever in that circumstance. But knowing this and doing this once you're staring down the barrel of a gun, or you're confronted with a knife or other deadly weapon, particularly if you're entirely taken by surprise, are two different experiences. Imagining while under no real stress or real threat what we would or should do is just never going to be the same processing and decision making event that being caught off guard by an actual perpetrator will be.

The Mickey Shunick case is an example of how when even if you're able to quickly turn the tables on a perpetrator and seriously injure him, you're not safe until he's dead or a miracle comes your way. Mickey is my heroine and her story is beyond remarkable. But she did not make it out of that fight despite truly valiant and committed behavior.
 
I don't think LE owes us anything.
I don't feel I have the right to know everything LE know.

But, I find it a bit unusual that LE are keeping things like timeline away from the public
Not real sure about what she was wearing.
Don't really know about the red shirt.
Have no idea how she was getting to work , who was picking her up. Maybe she was getting the car?

In all the cases I have PERSONALLY followed, LE puts out more information.

Does it help?
I haven't a clue
 
I don’t know about tactics. Probably. But I wouldn’t have a lawyer in his position either. I can’t afford one and if I was innocent I wouldn’t mortgage my family’s future to pay for one. And I have a pair of shorts that have holes in them. They are really comfy.
He’ll have a lawyer when this all blows over and a big payday awaits him.
 
We really can't know how she, or even we, would react. We think we know what we would do based on academic understanding that running and refusing to be coerced into a car likely offers the best opportunity to survive, and I hope I respond that way if, God forbid, I'm ever in that circumstance. But knowing this and doing this once you're staring down the barrel of a gun, or you're confronted with a knife or other deadly weapon, particularly if you're entirely taken by surprise, are two different experiences. Imagining while under no real stress or real threat what we would or should do is just never going to be the same processing and decision making event that being caught off guard by an actual perpetrator will be.

The Mickey Shunick case is an example of how when even if you're able to quickly turn the tables on a perpetrator and seriously injure him, you're not safe until he's dead or a miracle comes your way. Mickey is my heroine and her story is beyond remarkable. But she did not make it out of that fight despite truly valiant and committed behavior.
the guy ran into the back off her bike and was offered a ride
 
Hey all, have been keeping up but not posting on this case. I know lately there has been questions on if anyone thinks she left on her own or if she were abducted. This is just my 2 cents for what it's worth.

I need to wear contacts to see, I would and could leave my home without almost anything I own, except my contacts. This sticks out like a sore thumb to me that she left without them. Unless she had a backup pair that no one knows about, I cannot see her leaving freely without them.
 
I find it interesting that dad is quoted as saying "no one went into that house to hurt her" in an article in the Daily Mail today while mom says she doesn't think she returned from her jog. Which is it?

Reward for missing Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts hits $260,000 | Daily Mail Online
Mollie's parents are estranged. I believe the unconfirmed facts as we know them support Mum's theory that Molly disappeared after 7:30p in her jogging clothes, and she did make it back to BF house.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
2,970
Total visitors
3,105

Forum statistics

Threads
592,176
Messages
17,964,661
Members
228,715
Latest member
hannahdunnam
Back
Top