MY OPINIONS ONLY, NO FACTS HERE!!:
My timeline is too long to post as a single article! I broke it into two parts, as consecutive posts.
THE HOLLY BOBO CASE TIMELINE- Part I
Prologue:
Even though there has been (as of March 5, 2014) an arrest in the Holly Bobo case, I have decided to post my full timeline for this tragic but complex and interesting story. I have decided to NOT edit opinions that I developed before the recent arrest of the ‘main suspect’ in this case. Even though most of this timeline was written before the recent arrest of the ‘main suspect’, it may still be of value to interested sleuths. Since it may well be a very long time before any evidence against the ‘main suspect’ in the Holly Bobo case is revealed, my timeline does provide a baseline for what kinds of evidence could exist or not exist and also allows for development of additional theories. I have in some instances, greatly reduced the length of my original individual timeline entries, but preserved the significant details.
Apart from easily-recognizable acronyms, such as TBI or ATV or dates such as OCT or NOV, I will use BOLDED words or phrases for emphasis only (the equivalent of italicizing or underlining). I am not ‘shouting’ or ‘screaming’ when I use BOLDED characters! Parentheses, where used in my timeline, are only intended to distinguish one sentence or concept from another; their distribution has no other intent or meaning.
What follows is my most updated OCT. 12, 1990 through MARCH 5, 2014 Holly Bobo case timeline. This very latest version of my timeline includes almost all classes of entries (excepting psychic reports and statement analyses, although I do not necessarily dispute the value of statement analyses), and includes reports of credible, possibly credible and estimable character; even many internet myths or rumors are listed and identified as such. I find that unless internet rumors and other possibly questionable reports are vetted in my timeline AND IDENTIFIED AS SUCH, future derivative posts can get out of control. What I personally consider to be the more speculative entries in my newest timeline WILL BE (?bracketed in question marks?). REMEMBER, PHRASES THAT ARE ?bracketed in question marks? may be incompletely substantiated my me because I have not found enough confirming reports, motively-created by attention-seekers, speculative by nature, myths, locally-generated rumors, nationally-generated rumors, or solely the product of very clever trolls who have tricked most of us (remember, even seemingly reliable reports about the Holly Bobo abduction may not be supported by the official investigation). Where enclosing question marks are lacking for a string of words, but where I qualify a statement as ‘my opinion’ or with similar language, beware! Only the officials possess the facts; my personal opinions ARE NOT facts, unless by some serendipitous circumstance or complete accident! THIS IS AN UNOFFICIAL TIMELINE and because of the exhausting challenge of putting all of this together I MAY UNINTENTIONALLY HAVE INCLUDED ERRORS OR OMISSIONS REGARDING THE TIMES AND NATURE OF SPECIFIC EVENTS OR ACCIDENTALLY MISREPRESENTED SOME EVENTS OR THE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF EVENTS.
As usual for my timelines, I do not present the names OR abbreviations of peoples’ names (except for certain non-suspects such as the victim and those with a recognized celebrity status). Also, I do not steer readers towards a suspect, nor do I possess any particular bias towards any particular individual or individuals. Readers are free to draw their own conclusions from my timeline, but again- I HAVE NO BIAS AND I AM NOT ATTEMPTING TO DIRECT READERS TOWARDS ANY PARTICULAR CONCLUSIONS. The man currently under arrest for the kidnapping and murder of Holly Bobo will be referred to as the ‘main suspect’ in my timeline OR ‘main suspect’s’ where used in a possessive sense. I provide no URL address links, but present enough information in most individual timeline entries so that curious internet-saavy sleuths should be able to locate the associated historical news stories or blogs on the internet.
Several non-official investigative groups have become involved with the Holly Bobo case since its inception and the authorities were discontent with many or most of these private investigations. In my opinion a fair amount of hyperbole has been generated from non-official investigative channels. The full extent of non-official investigative contributions to the following timeline cannot be 100% determined by me, but I have done my best to distinguish such reports from more official-sounding reports throughout.
If I were asked my opinion about what is the most incongruent and perplexing aspect of the Holly Bobo case, it would be this: why did the perpetrator allow Holly to take ANY loose personal items with her from the abduction scene to the getaway vehicle? Why not just discard her cell phone, purse, lunch box/sling bag, etc. in the carport or out-of-sight in the nearby woods? If this evidence was left near-to the abduction scene, it would have had little or no investigative value. Also, the answer probably cannot be that this was a desperate “snatch-and-grab” abduction by a random crazed passerby; on the contrary- the abductor apparently spent some time talking or arguing with Holly (5 minutes or longer) before forcing her to leave with him. Were the loose personal items deliberately taken, so they could be planted at a later date? Was the crime this cleverly planned?
In my opinion, the second-most incongruent aspect of the Holly Bobo case concerns what has been reported about the tracking dog or dogs. Why was Holly’s scent not tracked deep into the woods with vehicle tracks in the dirt where the scent ended OR why was Holly’s scent not tracked out to the main (Swan Johnson) road? What other sensible possibilities are there?
In my opinion, the third-most incongruent aspect is this: with seemingly such a carefully-planned crime, why did the abductor apparently not realize that Holly’s brother was still at home on the morning of the abduction? The abductor knew enough to wait for Holly’s father and mother to leave at different times. But the abductor did not wait for Holly’s brother to leave. This was a huge oversight by the perpetrator.
In my opinion, the fourth-most incongruent aspect of this case concerns a portion of my timeline, and may well be a consequence of my own mistakes. Anyway, I have great difficulty with the relatively small amount of time allowed for all of the supposed events that occurred between my April 13, 2011, 7:50 AM (when Holly’s brother woke up) and 8:00 AM (when the neighbor woman arrived) timeline entries.
I have followed and recorded timeline data about the Holly Bobo case since the very beginning, but I am objective and not personally attached to this case. Note that I have written similar timelines for the McStay Family and Michelle Parker cases, as well as provided partial evaluations of events for other cases on Websleuths, such as for the Maura Murray and the Jamison Family cases. All of my sources are from the Internet. I have reviewed hundreds of internet newspaper articles and thousands of blog posts over the past three years that discuss the Holly Bobo case.
Now, thusly instructed and ‘informed’, please read my version of the complete timeline for the Holly Bobo case.
__________________________________________________________
OCT. 12, 1990
Holly Lynn Bobo is born. At this very earliest point of my timeline, I need to opine that the future adult Holly Bobo is a kind, gentle, generous, trusting, loving, intelligent, and sincerely religious young woman. If this case is to be understood, the sleuth must entertain no reservations or doubts about the integrity of Holly Bobo. In my opinion, Holly Bobo was a targeted innocent victim, pure and simple.
FEB. 1, 2005
There are links online to the Decatur County Chronicle where the poster says that Holly Bobo is shown as being on the Principal’s List (great school grades I assume) as of this date. Clipped and pasted text from the poster seems to confirm this, but the cited link is broken and I cannot confirm the reported information back to its original source.
MAR. 5, 2008
The Henderson County News shows Holly Bobo as being on the 11th grade honor roll. Her full name is confirmed as Holly Lynn Bobo.
JAN. 28, 2009
Holly Bobo is shown by Henderson County News as being on the Senior Class honor roll at Scotts Hill High School. This is a good place to mention how confusing local nomenclature can be to an outsider. Scotts Hill High School is in Reagan, TENN. Post-abduction reports about Holly Bobo are based from and/or mention her home location as Parsons, and less commonly as Darden, TENN. The FBI states that Holly’s home is in Darden, TENN. Researchers will also find the town of Lexington and numerous other towns mentioned by name. Some names, such as Bible Hill and Yellow Springs, may refer to roads or unincorporated settlements rather than a formal incorporated town.
MAY 13, 2009
The Henderson County News lists the 2009 graduates from Scotts Hill High School, which include Holly Bobo.
sometime during ?2010?:
Holly Bobo begins attending classes to become a Licensed Practical Nurse. These studies were at the Tennessee Technology Center in Parsons (‘UT’ may be the local vernacular for this college), an extension campus of the University of Tennessee; however Holly Bobo was not a UT-Martin student sensu-stricto. Note that in a later post below (April 23 to 24, 2011), one or more pieces of crime-evidence may have been recovered from near-to the Tennessee Technology Center (the so-called “Easter evidence”
.
JAN. ?23?, 2011
A man tries to abduct a woman from outside her home in Hickman County. She resists, and the man runs off. See my April 20 to 21, 2011 entry below, for more information.
APRIL ?2? or 4, 2011
The future ‘main suspect’ in the Holly Bobo abduction (see my FEB. 28 to APRIL 1, 2014 entry, much further below) is said to have been arrested by rangers in Natchez Trace State Park on charges of tampering with evidence, assault on an officer, drug possession, and resisting arrest. By this time, the future ‘main suspect’ already had a long history of arrests.
around APRIL 6, 2011
Holly Bobo ?may have attended and/or worked a booth at and/or sang at a raccoon dog trial event?. Also, see my May 11, 2011 and May 3, 2013 entries below, regarding this event. Some bloggers believe that the future perpetrator saw Holly at this social event. My opinion- this is possible, but I believe that the perpetrator knew about Holly before this event (assuming that Holly even attended this event). It has been stated that Holly Bobo had an “angelic” voice and liked to sing in talent contests as well as at Corinth Baptist Church, where she was a member. Regarding the perpetrator: in my opinion, somebody became obsessed/angry with Holly at one of her four principal activities over the most-recent year or years before her abduction- high school, college, church, or scheduled community events. My theoretical person who became obsessed/angry with Holly Bobo does not have to be the actual kidnapper; this person could have motivated another person or persons to commit the abduction.
APRIL 13, 2011, Wednesday- ENTRIES BELOW ARE ON THIS DATE, UNTIL A LATER DATE IS SPECIFICALLY INDICATED IN THE HEADER TO AN ENTRY. The FBI describes Holly Bobo as 5’ 3” tall, 110 pounds, and wearing a pink T-shirt and light-blue jeans on the day of her abduction. Less-officially, I have seen many mentions that Holly was wearing ?black flip-flops? at the time of her abduction. .
4:30 AM: (Holly awoke and was in her bedroom studying for an important test at college that day, witnesses unknown). (An inch of rain has been reported to have fallen ?the day before?; this means that anyone using unpaved secondary roads in the area should have left foot tracks and/or tire impressions). (In my opinion, this would also aid tracking dogs, because the heavy rain washed away earlier scents, making new scents seem much stronger). My opinion again- if this rain event occurred as reported, it is VERY relevant to the accuracy of the dog-tracking evidence. Note that historical weather records show that this significant rain event probably occurred on April 11, 2011. In either case, this should have significantly aided investigators, both with regards to finding human/vehicle tracks AND aiding the tracking dogs.
4:30 to just before 5:30 AM: (In my opinion, this would be the very latest time interval during which a perpetrator would have arrived on the scene and watched for Holly’s father and mother to leave to go to their respective jobs. I personally believe that any outside perpetrator should have arrived by 4:00 AM to successfully carry out the abduction).
5:30-5:35 AM: (Holly is still in her bedroom, available witness is her father). I believe that her father spoke to her through the door before he left for work. This should be a solidly-timed entry.
5:30-5:35 AM: (Holly’s father leaves for work, available witness is himself and possibly Holly’s mother). This should be a solidly-timed entry.
5:35-6:30 AM: I propose that Holly spent part of this time period studying in her bedroom for the important College test and also spent part of this time period doing the normal things to get ready for the day.
6:30-7:00 AM: (Holly is in her bedroom and later at her breakfast table and her mother makes a lunch for Holly, available witness is Holly’s mother).
?Just before 7:00 AM?: Holly is texting her College girlfriend while still in her bedroom or shortly after arriving at the breakfast table. Her College girlfriend would be the witness to this activity.
7:00 AM: (Holly’s mother leaves for work at a local school; available witness is Holly’s mother). This should be a solidly-timed entry.
7:00 AM to ?7:05 AM?: (Holly is texting and talking on the phone with her College girlfriend, witness is her girlfriend). In more detail: originally Holly and her girlfriend were texting back-and-forth but the signal was weak so the girlfriend used her house landline phone to re-dial Holly “around 7:00 o’ clock.” This last call was apparently brief; ?possibly a couple of minutes?. The time period for this entry should be modestly accurate.
?7:05-7:10 AM?: Holly studies for her College exam at her breakfast table “for a few minutes”.
?7:10 AM to 7:15 AM?: (Holly’s boyfriend calls Holly to tell her about him being accused just earlier in the morning of trespassing on her grandmother’s property across the county while turkey hunting; one witness is Holly’s boyfriend). (Presumably, the investigators have confirmed or denied this incident via the owners of the grandmother’s property and phone records).
?7:15 to 7:30 AM?: (There are a flurry of calls between Holly/Holly’s boyfriend and Holly’s mother about the accidental and embarrassing ‘trespassing’ incident; available witnesses are Holly’s boyfriend and mother and possibly others). I am assuming that at this time, Holly’s mother was not yet working in her class at school AND was still available to answer her cell phone on demand.
7:30-7:35 AM: (Holly talked with her mother on the phone, available witness is her mother and presumably the cell phone records). (Based upon my timeline below, Holly’s mother ?must have went to class just after this cell phone call and left her cell phone where her secretary could hear it ring?). This should be a solidly-timed entry.
?7:35-7:39 AM?: Holly Bobo should have been gathering her stuff together and getting ready to leave her home during this time period. For example, gathering her purse, cell phone, lunch, and school materials.
7:39 AM: Newschannel5.com reports that ?a post was made to the Facebook page of the later-to-be-identified ‘main suspect’? who is ultimately arrested for Holly Bobo’s abduction. This Facebook post, if it actually happened, was sinister and derogatory towards an unidentified woman. However, the ‘main suspect’s on-and-off girlfriend at the time claims that ?the ‘main suspect’ was actually referring to her? (and by inference, not Holly Bobo). Ironically, depending upon the location from where this Facebook post originated, it could provide an alibi of sorts for the ‘main suspect’- UNLESS more than one perpetrator is involved. (And I am well aware such theories, including the most recently-proposed “triad” of perpetrators).
Slightly before or at 7:40 AM: (Holly is going outside to her car which is 10 to 12 feet from the nearest home exit door- possibly at 5 minutes earlier than her usual schedule so as to not miss an important college exam, no available witnesses except the perpetrator). (?Some reports suggest the car was in her long driveway, and other reports suggest it was in a carport?). (Her car was probably in the carport attached to the back of her house, based upon numerous later reports and blogs).
About 7:40 AM-1st event: (Holly is confronted by the perpetrator near her black Mustang automobile. She drops her can of soda in surprise or because of an immediate physical confrontation. According to officials the mystery perpetrator is likely to be someone who was familiar with her daily schedule). (?It is also said that Holly was led a short distance from the carport back into a semi-enclosed garage?). Holly’s car is said to have been washed four days earlier, so it was now more clean and reflective. It is reported that Holly’s abductor ?may have been hiding around the corner in the carport watching for Holly’s reflection on her car?. In my opinion, these theoretical scenarios hardly make the abductor sound like some random stranger; it seems that the abductor was quite familiar with Holly’s morning schedule, BUT the abductor would have to be unaware that Holly’s brother was still at the house. I mean- would you try to abduct a woman if you believed her brother was still in her home and did not know if he was watching with a gun or whatever?
About 7:40 AM-2nd event: (Someone screamed in the direction of Holly’s house; male witness to this scream lives in a house ?nearest? to Holly’s home). This male witness is an adult man who lives with his mother. The timing of this entry should be fairly accurate.
About 7:40 AM-3rd event: (Holly is attacked/restrained in some manner and leaves a small amount of blood on the carport floor; also see later entries). There seems to be very widespread support that blood was found. (My personal opinion- although the perpetrator may have had a firearm, for the sake of silence- a knife was used to commit the abduction and the blood was from Holly being incidentally scratched/cut somewhere OR struck on the face to promote submissiveness).
?7:40-7:45 AM?: (The adult male in the neighboring household tells his mother who lives with him about hearing the scream from the direction of the Bobo home). (According to one post I saw, this man ?may have been adding oil to his vehicle at the time of the scream?). (?This might have led to a couple-minute delay in reporting it to his mother?). It has been reported by some that this neighbor woman then called 911, but in my opinion this particular event did not happen.
?7:40-7:50 AM?: (The adult male neighbor’s mother tries to call Holly’s mother at work about the scream, witness is school secretary who relays this info to Holly’s mother, who is now in class).
7:50 AM: Holly’s brother wakes up because his family’s house dog is barking; available witness is himself. Note that I have previously suggested on Websleuths that Holly’s brother may have ?been awakened as early as 7:40 to 7:45 AM?, only because this allows more time for the numerous closely-spaced incidents listed below to occur. However, until shown otherwise, I will treat this as a fairly-accurate time entry. (?It has been claimed that there were two dogs, one inside the house and one tied up or penned outside of the house?). (The latest reports suggest that any dog outside the house was not tied up or penned and was friendly and trusting). In my opinion, it might be worth considering that the family dog outside was already familiar with the scent of the perpetrator from previous experience, but I equally recognize that 9 out of 10 house dogs become submissive when approached by a dominant-behaving male human.
?7:51- 7:52 AM?: (Now, looking out of his window, Holly’s brother notices Holly’s car is unexpectedly still there and sees the silhouettes of two people kneeling down by the car; he also hears voices of two people, available witness is himself). (Note that I am confused from various reports about whether the two silhouettes were seen leaning down, kneeling, squatting or sitting). (Most recently the story is that the brother saw Holly and a man kneeling and facing each other and talking. Holly sounded very upset and heated, but most of the talking was being done by the perpetrator. The only words of the conversation the brother could understand was Holly saying- “no, why?”
. From Holly’s brother’s witness description, the FBI describes the perpetrator as being 5’ 8” to 6’ 0” tall, weighing 200 pounds, and wearing camouflage clothing.
?7:52 – 7:53 AM?: (Holly’s brother calls Holly’s mother who is at work but gets no answer because his mother’s cell phone is not with her, witnesses are himself and his mother’s school secretary). (I want to clarify this statement; it is said that the mother’s phone was in another room in the school). It would seem possible that the school secretary either heard the mother’s cell phone ringing, or Holly’s brother made a second follow-up call to the secretary’s number to get through to Holly’s mother.
?7:53 – 7:54 AM?: (Holly’s mother gets the message from the school secretary and calls her son/Holly’s brother who tells his mother about Holly’s car still being there and the two people he saw, available witnesses are son and mother). Relevantly, in the April 30, 2013 WSMV-TV episode, Holly’s mother implies that she did not tell her son at this time about the earlier scream reported by the neighbor man to his mother to Holly’s mother. This oversight could have contributed to confusion, whereby Holly’s brother was still somewhat convinced that the strange man was Holly’s boyfriend.
?7:54 – 7:56 AM?: (The alarmed mother now calls 911 but is shortly thereafter not satisfied that she talked to the right office, witness is Henderson County dispatch). To date, this is the earliest call to 911 that I can propose. However, in my opinion, I still feel that an earlier (around 7:40 to 7:45 AM) call to 911 by someone would better support the status-quo of my timeline in this case, but such a call is not supported by my personal evaluation of the available evidence.
?7:55 – 7:57 AM?: (Holly is viewed from her house by her brother being led towards and/or into the adjacent woods by a man in camouflage clothing; available witness is Holly’s brother). (I have heard rumors of ?specks of blood on the lawn?). It is reported that Holly and her abductor walked at least a short distance down a four-wheeler path to the left of a tree house into the woods with the family dog accompanying them and wagging its tail (?did the dog recognize the scent of the abductor, or was it simply being submissive?). It is also reported that ?Holly’s family theorized that the abductor may have ultimately led Holly from the edge of the woods and back to the main road where a getaway vehicle was parked?. I have supported this latter opinion from the very beginning. In my opinion, nothing else makes sense to me. However, when you read the unofficial reports about the search dogs (later in my timeline), it becomes more confusing. But to be clear about this- in my opinion, nobody witnessed Holly being led out to the main road OR deeply into the woods until out-of-sight; rather Holly’s brother ?saw Holly and the man walking towards a trail/road at the edge of the woods?. Repeating myself, to the best of my knowledge, nobody witnessed Holly and the perpetrator passing out-of-sight into the deep woods. Nor did anybody report a strange vehicle parked in the woods or out on the main road (Swan Johnson) at the time of Holly’s abduction.
?7:56 – 7:57 AM?: (Holly’s mother calls her son again and her son says Holly is walking into woods with a man he thinks is her boyfriend- but the mother says it cannot be her boyfriend and to call 911 and go outside with a gun and follow them; available witnesses are son and mother).
just after ?7:58 AM?: (?The abductor has left the woods and is approaching or already in a getaway vehicle with Holly Bobo on Swan Johnson road?) This scenario is purportedly based upon early published comments from investigators; the time is added by me. (This theory seems to have ?been somewhat supported by Holly’s family? AND by my much earlier posts to Websleuths). However, I can find no evidence that the tracking dogs supported this or any particularly sensible scenario (discussed above and below in my timeline).
?7:57 – 7:59 AM?: (Holly’s mother calls 911 again, but to a more relevant phone number, witness is Decatur County dispatch). (Some early official reports make it sound like Holly’s mother made only one 911 call, but I personally believe that she made at least two 911 calls).
?7:58 – 7:59 AM?: (Holly’s brother tries to call Holly but gets voice-mail; available witness is himself and presumably the cell phone records). This would suggest that Holly is no longer allowed to answer her phone by this time and/or her cell phone has been disabled. (Holly’s brother then tries to call Holly’s boyfriend but gets voice-mail, available witness is himself and presumably the cell phone records). Since Holly’s boyfriend was apparently hunting at the time, he may well have turned off the ringer on his phone or the two phones were out-of-range.
Around ?7:59 AM?: (As per his mother’s request, Holly’s brother gets a pistol and walks out of house and notices blood and a spilled can of soda by Holly’s car, available witness is himself and presumably later investigators). (?There are reports that Holly’s brother initially thought that this blood was from a turkey that Holly’s boyfriend had killed?). (Note that I am confused here, because some reports indicate ?the blood was in the semi-enclosed garage and other reports indicate the blood was by Holly’s car, which I understand was not IN the semi-enclosed garage?). (I am inclined from the very latest reports to now opine that Holly’s car was IN the carport attached to her house and that the blood was there too). At this point, let me mention that some bloggers claim that there is an enclosed garage on the front of the Bobo home, and a carport attached in the rear. From ground photos, I myself cannot see a garage on the front (Swan Johnson-road side) of the Bobo Home. My opinion is that Holly was abducted from the attached carport at the rear of the Bobo home.
7:59 AM – 8:00 AM: (Holly’s brother calls 911, just as he hears sirens, witness is presumably the dispatcher- note that this call may have been at 7:59 AM based on a supposed official comment).
8:00 AM: (The previously-mentioned neighbor woman whose adult son heard the earlier and ?singular? scream, pulls up to Holly’s house and reports the scream her son heard earlier- to Holly’s brother; the neighbor woman and Holly’s brother are witnesses for each other). (My opinions only- from this story I assume that the brother has temporarily given up his search for his sister in the woods and is now standing in full sight near his house). This should be a moderately well-timed entry.
8:00-ish: (The first police car arrives at Holly Bobo’s house, “just after 8 o’clock”
. In my opinion, this timing is about right, I would pick a time range of 8:02 to 8:05 AM for the arrival of police if my opinion was requested. It would be useful to know which direction (on Swan Johnson Road) the police arrived from. In my opinion, the officers did not arrive from the north because if so, they could have encountered the perpetrator’s getaway vehicle.
8:00-ish: (?The immediate area where Holly was last seen was searched by up to three officers?; this is both indicated and contradicted by these two news-report versions of events: “Decatur County Sheriff [name omitted] said as soon as deputies arrived, they took a statement from [Holly’s brother] and began searching where Holly was last seen” OR “[the sheriff] said deputies did not want to enter the area or allow others to do so for fear that they would impair some evidence that might be found and because they were waiting on a search dog and trying to gather information leading them to go a certain direction.”
. In my opinion, which of these two accounts is closest to fact IS important. Interestingly, the purported second version of events (officials waited a fair amount of time before searching) is supported by a family friend on an April 30, 2013 episode from WSMV-TV. Also, see my 8:35 to 8:45 and 10:15 AM posts below, regarding the ‘delayed search’ scenario.
8:15 AM-ish: (Based upon the proposed timeline to this point and my ‘guesstimated’ travel time, ?this would be the earliest that Holly’s mother would be expected to have made it back to her home?, assuming that she left from the school where she worked). (However, at least one news report stated that ?Holly’s mother was already back home when the police arrived?- if true, this would be a serious problem for my timeline). (?Holly’s mother was driven to her home by a friend and was not driving her own car?). (If a friend drove Holly’s mother to the house, it is not clear to me why the Holly’s mother was not using her own vehicle, but she may simply have been ?too rattled by the events to drive her own vehicle safely and/or needed to talk on her cell phone?). (I have seen a rumor that ?Holly’s mother called the police twice while on her way from the school back to her home?). (?Perhaps at least one of these cell phone calls was to her husband?).
about 8:30 AM: (Holly’s father arrives back home from his workplace; ?I suppose he was alerted on his phone about the events by his wife and/or the police?).
After 8:35 AM: (This is the very earliest time when the State Patrol or other officials could have brought in a search dog or dogs; it is implied that this was the same day that Holly disappeared). (I cannot establish with certainty whether the tracking dog or dogs were employed at 8:35 AM or instead much later (see below), but believe that it was not unnecessarily long after Holly disappeared and at least on the same day). Any scents should have still been fresh and easily followed.
8:35 to 8:45 AM: (?This is approximately the earliest time when the police may have began a ground search around the property?). An early news account places the search as beginning ?45 minutes? after police arrived. However, on the April 30, 2013 WSMV-TV episode, a family friend states that it was more than two hours before the official search began, because the police were waiting for search dogs and a helicopter. Also see my 10:15 AM post below, regarding the ‘delayed search’ scenario.
Later than 8:35 AM and possibly later than 10:15 AM: (There are two principal stories; ?one is that the dogs could not track Holly’s scent into the woods; the other version is that the dogs crossed the family ‘lawn’ to a path and continued a short distance on that path shallowly into the woods and lost the scent near a logging road?). In my opinion, it is likely that the dog or dogs lost Holly’s scent just upon the edge of the woods. Also in my opinion, if the dog or dogs could not track Holly’s scent out to the main road (Swan Johnson Rd.) OR to human/vehicle tracks in the mud on a logging road (it had recently rained heavily- see my 4:30 AM entry, above), something is incongruent with my timeline descriptions. In my opinion, the nose of a dog does not lie and possesses no bias- IF a tracking dog has a fresh scent and IF its handlers do not consciously or subconsciously give the dog cues. In my opinion, the various stories concerning the tracking dogs generally imply that the scent suddenly stopped or was indistinct and directionless and no scent evidence was found very far beyond the edge of the Bobo family’s ‘lawn’. Also, in my opinion, what the tracking dogs ultimately determined is second only to the location of Holly’s white sling-bag/lunch box (described in a later entry) in understanding this case.
9:06 AM: THIS REPORT MAY BE COMPLETELY FALSE, SO BEWARE! (?Holly’s cell phone pinged, placing her phone about a mile from her house, near the junction of Swan Johnson and 5 Forks Roads?). (This is an internet rumor that appeared as early as April 21 to 22, 2011, but the exact time and more precise location of this ping may have been added to the internet rumor mill at a later date).
9:12 AM: THESE REPORTS MAY BE COMPLETELY FALSE INTERNET CONTRIVANCES, SO BEWARE! (?A cell phone belonging to a publicly-unidentified individual pinged ‘six minutes away’ from the location of Holly’s 9:06 AM ping?). (?The mystery cell phone owner’s vehicle is said to have been seen earlier on Swan Johnson Road on the morning of April 13, 2011?). (?This ping may correlate with the one said to have occurred from a location near the intersection of Highway 882, and Russ Long-Cub Creek Hill Roads?).
9:58 AM: BEWARE! Yet another internet report surfaces that (?Holly’s cell phone pinged about ¼ mile from her house at Five Forks around this time?). Some or all of the cell phone-ping stories may be false. HOWEVER, in my opinion, it is not unreasonable that Holly’s phone did ping at some close-by location before being disabled by the perpetrator, but the TBI has not confirmed that Holly’s cell phone ever pinged at all. The perpetrator did have the time to disable Holly’s cell phone at the abduction site. (But why would the perpetrator disable her phone on the spot and then take it with him to the getaway vehicle?).
10:15 AM: Based upon some accounts, the official search with dogs and officers could have been delayed until, or even later than this time. When I look at the full history of reports, I sort of support that the main search did occur at this later time. Also, see some of my above entries regarding the ‘delayed search’ issue.
APRIL 13, morning: internet rumors cropped up very early on about an ?ATV being locally-reported as stolen? on the same morning as Holly Bobo’s abduction. An argument against any ATV usage for the abduction will be revisited in a different entry below.
APRIL 13, ?afternoon?: It is said that 250 volunteers searched around Holly Bobo’s home. ?This seems unlikely at such an early date?, but is based upon the very earliest newspaper reports. It is implied by a WKRN-TV report that- ?250 volunteers searched around the Holly Bobo home on Wednesday, April 13, 2011?. At this point I want to mention that I have been unable to find official evidence that Holly Bobo’s home and outbuildings/structures were taped-off/isolated and systematically and carefully searched by authorities (not volunteers) on April 13. I include this detail mainly because variations on this question have been posed by bloggers. In my opinion, it is not counterintuitive to immediately isolate and search ALL STRUCTURES thoroughly. For example, what if the perpetrator did very briefly enter Holly’s home (or was hiding inside her home!) and accidentally left forensic evidence behind? What if the perpetrator hid inside or beneath any close-by structures before the abduction? There could be footprints, fingerprints, chewing gum, fibers, cigarette butts, drug residues, tobacco spit, etc.
APRIL 14, 2011
(?At least 50 searchers are active? I have seen another report that there were ?300? searchers). The Bobo family holds a press conference. A $25,000 reward, funded by the community, is announced by the Decatur County sheriff. The reward is for information that leads to Holly Bobo’s safe return. Around this date, country music star Whitney Duncan made an appeal on Facebook for her fans to pray for Holly’s safe return (?this could have been as early as the 13th?). Holly Bobo is Whitney Duncan’s cousin. Whitney Duncan also mentions the $25,000 reward in a tweet on the ?14th?.
APRIL 14 to ?15?, 2011, evening
?A local landowner? discovered Holly’s white sling-bag/lunch box [also called a “lunch purse” by authorities] along a creek about 6 to 8 miles from her abduction site. (This should represent the so-called ‘Bible Hill discovery’, although it is said to actually be on ?Gooch Road?) (I prefer the 14th for this find, rather than the 15th, based upon ?the very earliest? news accounts). (Note that this version of the discovery is confusing because the earliest reports talked about ‘searchers’, but the initial find was possibly ?made by one local landowner?. ?Perhaps the police and volunteers immediately went to the site and contributed to the discoveries?). (There are limited internet rumors about ?blood on Holly’s white sling-bag/lunch box?). In my opinion, the location of this evidence is the seminal aspect of the Holly Bobo case and the ultimate key to its understanding. Let me explain my personal opinions further- the perpetrator may have planted this evidence to misdirect the investigation towards someone else (someone he disliked and/or who he figured would then become the principal suspect) –OR- the position of this evidence is directly relevant to the identity/general location/getaway route of the perpetrator. No third possibility occurs to me. In my opinion, the location of this evidence is not random in any scenario- it has real meaning to the astute sleuth. If the reported location of this evidence is greatly misrepresented by me, or the evidence never existed in the first place, then of course ignore this entry.
APRIL 15, 2011
On this date or slightly earlier, a female Bobo family relative (a paternal cousin of Holly Bobo) made a plea for help in finding Holly Bobo. Also, around this date, an officer (TBI or local) was reported to have said that Holly’s boyfriend and brother were not suspects. See my April 18, 2011 and April 26, 2011 entries below regarding the ongoing confusion about the subject of suspects from official reports.
APRIL 15, 2011, mid-day to afternoon
(Strong storms were forecast for the region during this time period, perhaps searches were delayed for a short while-evening through early morning; note that I have seen a similar report for April 26-are these two separate weather events?). Also, around this time, reports surfaced about a parked vehicle that contained camouflage clothing and a cell phone (the discovery of this vehicle may have been on the 13th or 14th). This latter report was quickly dropped and even removed from some news websites. In my opinion, this vehicle report could well be accurate, but was immediately determined by authorities to not be relevant to the Holly Bobo case. This conclusion is somewhat backed up by an ABC internet news report on April 15, 2011.
ON OR ABOUT APRIL 16 or 17, 2011
(?The volunteer search is moved to the Gooch Road/Bible Hill area. The apocryphal duct tape with hair and additional items may refer to this locality, a day or two later into this search?). (Anyway, ?additional items may have been recovered?, leading to odd and somewhat unbelievable internet rumors of ?the discovery of lipstick, chapstick, jeans, a dollar bill with Holly’s name, and two pages from a Psychology textbook with Holly’s name on the pages?). It is not perfectly clear to me if these provocative but questionable internet rumors are all directed at discoveries in the Gooch Road area or elsewhere. But, unless and until confirmed officially, BEWARE these possibly mythical reports!
APRIL 17, 2011
According to at least one blog and a Tennessee Baptist website, Holly Bobo was ?originally scheduled to sing a solo at Corinth Baptist Church on this date?. It is also claimed that two ads were posted on the internet (from the Parsons-Jacksonville areas) for the sale of ATV tires around this date. I long-ago identified one of these ads (Parsons), so this report may not be entirely mythical. See my APRIL 13, morning entry above about the stolen 4-wheeler. Some bloggers have attempted to relate one or both of the APR 13, morning incident and this later incident to the abduction of Holly Bobo. I personally do not believe that a 4-wheeler was relevant to this crime and consider these ads to be totally irrelevant to the Holly Bobo case.
ON OR ABOUT APRIL 17 or 18, 2011
(This is the earliest time-span where I can suggest that ?searches were being conducted in Natchez Trace State Park, with 350 volunteers?, although I have found dates as late as April 22 for the extended search here). In my opinion, the earliest possible dates for this search would likely predate the recovery and investigative review of any cell phone records, and instead be based upon a civilian tip or an investigative hunch. (Internet rumors began to circulate that ?Holly had been held in an abandoned cabin in or near the park for a period of time?). Also, around this time interval, officials asked local citizens to be on the lookout for changes in behavior of anyone they knew; exhibiting such behavior as missing work Wednesday through Friday or someone who may have excessively cleaned or sold a standard vehicle or an all-terrain vehicle. This official proclamation has led some bloggers/researchers to consider that an ATV was used during the abduction. Also, see my APRIL 17, 2011 and APRIL 13, morning posts above, regarding 4-wheeler theories. Considering the all-terrain vehicle angle, in my opinion, the use of a 4-wheeler or another ATV for the abduction is unlikely. Too clumsy, too noisy, too visible, and too memorable to witnesses. In my opinion, the ATV theories are cultural in origin. This logic was used- most people in the local area have ATVs and work, hunt and play with them, so an ATV was used in this high-profile crime. In the real world- would you try to abduct a panicked victim from her home and hold her in front of or next to you in plain sight on the seat (for a long bumpy ride through the woods) on your noisy Ranger or 4-Wheeler? Think about this. The victim could jump and escape or fall off at any time during the attempted abduction. Also, this ATV would at some point have to be loaded onto a trailer or into a truck bed, because NOBODY has reported an ATV with Holly Bobo and a man on it racing down Swan Johnson or another main road on the day of her abduction! In my opinion, the trunk of a car, the floor on the passenger’s side of a truck or car, under a pickup bed-cover, or inside a camper would be much more likely places (to restrain and conceal a victim). In my opinion, if only one perpetrator was involved, the trunk of a car was used. If more than one perpetrator was involved, a truck with a camper becomes more likely.
Part II of my timeline follows in the post below.
