Viable suspect: Terry Hobbs #1

[reedus23]

Thanks for your input, HoneyWest! It's appreciated. :hug:

What I would LOVE to do (or find) is a really hardass breakdown of Hobbs' timeline past 4.30 that day. Or all available versions of that, as it were... since it does shift around somewhat.

I'm not in a hurry, and if there's not one around, I'll happily make one myself as time permits.

If Hobbs is, at then end of an exhaustive look into WHY he was a good suspect, actually NOT a good suspect (I'm not presently concerned with GUILT as much as 'good suspect') - I would be happy to change my opinion there. But right now, I am after facts and solid theories, links and docs where possible.

Of course, doing my own work but I'd love input, hence the thread.

I started doing this some time ago and will have to look at it again. I used different color pens to denote the sources, i.e. Hobbs Interview, Hobbs' depo, Jacoby statement etc... I'll try to re-acquaint myself with it. The problem I started running into was in presentation because the stories change. I'll see what I can come up with.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I'd like to offer just a bit of clarification on the Jackie Hicks, Jr. situation. Because JH, Jr. survived more than a year after the shooting, TH was not charged with the crime. In his Pasdar deposition, TH tries to dismiss the incident by claiming that his gun killed JH, Jr., not him (that the gun just went off while he was holding it, IOW). JH, Jr. died of complications from the gunshot when he had surgery that was to remove some of the fragments left in his stomach, IIRC.

I can understand why Hobbs was a pallbearer at the funeral. At that time, the Hicks family was trying to be accepting of Pam's choice for a mate. At that time (prior to the mtDNA findings), Hobbs wasn't a suspect. The Hicks were trusting people, wanting very much to believe the police. They were, IMO, wrong. The finding of the mtDNA did, of course, raise alarm bells (although Pam and Terry had divorced several years earlier). Any intelligent person would reexamine a relationship in such a situation, especially since the divorce had already happened.

IMO, Pam and her family, just like the other parents, very much wanted the police to be correct. That way they could be content that their sons' "murderers" were being punished. However, again, refusing to look at new information in a case like this is just plain foolish. The new information has led Pam (and her family) to suspect Hobbs and has also led JMB to likewise suspect him as well. Remaining in a vacuum in a case like this just isn't healthy, IMO, and is certainly isn't the just thing to do! If it were my child, I'd want to be sure that the right person was apprehended and punished - and I wouldn't quit fighting for that to happen until it did!

 

[primitivefuture]

One thing, if it's true, that makes Terry Hobbs a very viable suspect is that Pam's sister noticed after the murders that Hobbs had a shoelace missing from one of his tennis shoes. I know he owned a pair of L.A. Gear shoes, the type with two different color laces in each shoe. The problem with this revelation is that she said nothing about it until years later, 2007 I believe. I don't know if there is a way to prove this, but if it's true, I'd say it's a very big deal considering the boys were bound with shoe laces and it seems the killer may have used one of his own laces during the course of the murders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ausgirl]

Right. I'm going to make some uncomfortable and not-very-verified statements, just something that -- I personally- hold as 'suspicious' at this time.

I dunno about anyone else, but I found the stories regarding Chris Byers being 'obsessed' with 4yo Amanda quite.. well, disturbing. And I felt bad about that, because it's natural to want that sort of relationship to be innocent. But really? Says another part of me (the part that's actually been mother to a 4yo girl). Really? How normal --is-- it for an 8yo boy to want a 4yo as his 'girlfriend' and want to hang out with her? The gap between those ages is monumental, developmentally and socially speaking. TBH, I didn't find it cute, as much as I found it weird.

So.. add to that the various behavioural issues and parental concerns regarding Chris and the possibility he was being molested.

Add to --that-- the allegations made by Pam Hobbs and family about Terry abusing Amanda and his first-marriage son.

Add to --that--the fact that Chris was happy to stay and watch TV with Amanda rather than race after his 8yo buddies..

Is it possible Pam and co were right, and so were Mark and Melissa Byers, and maybe that the two concerns were not a separate issue?

Makes my skin crawl to think it. But I can't help thinking it, you know? The elements are all right there.

 

[Cappuccino]

I'm not so sure, I've often felt that the "concerns" about Christopher Byers were blown out of proportion a bit. Notice none of those concerns were raised before the murders - I think we all have a tendency to look back after something terrible has happened and read all kinds of things into incidents that seemed trivial at the time and even exaggerate them. Example - the story about Ryan and his friend walking in on Chris in his bedroom masturbating. How big a deal is that really? He wasn't in the street, he was in his own bedroom exploring his own body. I doubt there's a male alive who hasn't done that in the privacy of their own bedroom at some stage.

 

[Ausgirl]

Well. I'm not usually one to jump at shadows - unless those shadows are particularly dark and have a funny smell, iykwim.

I agree, it would be silly to blow one single incident out of proportion, but still, something here in the sum total of -all- the incidents and little oddnesses makes me pretty uncomfortable.

I was hesitant in posting it, tbh, because yeah.. a lot of the various components are easy to dismiss as 'nothings'. All together, though, and if I am to momentarily give -any- credence to the idea that -maybe- Hobbs was indeed molesting his own kids, I have to wonder if he didn't molest other kids within reach, too. Possibly at the same time.

Ofc, if I choose to dismiss Pam & co's assertions that Hobbs was a molester, this all goes out the window. And I am honestly undecided, there.

eta: iirc, the Byers were actually concerned about Chris prior to the murders?

 

[Cappuccino]

Melissa Byers asked Christopher if he was being molested and Christopher said no. She then reiterated the general warning that nobody should be touching him in his swimsuit area, Christopher said he knew and understood and that was that.

I see no reason to believe that Christopher wasn't telling the truth.

 

[reedus23]

I'd like to offer just a bit of clarification on the Jackie Hicks, Jr. situation. Because JH, Jr. survived more than a year after the shooting, TH was not charged with the crime. In his Pasdar deposition, TH tries to dismiss the incident by claiming that his gun killed JH, Jr., not him (that the gun just went off while he was holding it, IOW). JH, Jr. died of complications from the gunshot when he had surgery that was to remove some of the fragments left in his stomach, IIRC.

That was some of the craziest testimony I've ever read when he claimed he didn't shoot JH, Jr., that the gun did. IMO it is also a scary thing because it shows how he can de-personalize matters. I don't doubt for a second that he has convinced himself he had nothing to do with shooting JH, Jr. That same train of thought could also convince a person they didn't kill 3 small children, the water did or the stick did or whatever other object it was.

 

[reedus23]

I'm not so sure, I've often felt that the "concerns" about Christopher Byers were blown out of proportion a bit. Notice none of those concerns were raised before the murders - I think we all have a tendency to look back after something terrible has happened and read all kinds of things into incidents that seemed trivial at the time and even exaggerate them. Example - the story about Ryan and his friend walking in on Chris in his bedroom masturbating. How big a deal is that really? He wasn't in the street, he was in his own bedroom exploring his own body. I doubt there's a male alive who hasn't done that in the privacy of their own bedroom at some stage.

8 just seems like a very young age is what raised flags for me.

 

[Cappuccino]

8 just seems like a very young age is what raised flags for me.

Is it really though? I don't want to say anything crude, but boys have those bits from birth, does it usually take them more than 8 years to become curious enough to touch it? I doubt it somehow.

Also worth bearing in mind that Christopher had a teenage half brother in the house - Ryan was at an age where he might have adult material stashed in his room that he didn't want his mother to see, but a curious younger brother might easily stumble on it. That could put ideas into an 8 year old's head that he wouldn't be old enough to fully understand the connotations of.

 

[Ausgirl]

^ just for the record, this wasn't actually any major part of my concerns.

 

[Cappuccino]

Yes, I just used that as an example of how things can get blown out of proportion with hindsight. As to the concerns you did raise, I'm afraid I don't take the Hicks family accusations against Hobbs seriously. If there was any truth to them, why weren't they raised at the time? And why do Amanda and Terry's son from his first marriage have a good relationship with him to the extent that they allow him access to their own children?

 

[NCSleuth]

You can simply hit the alert button and mods will review and do what is necessary if it's wrong.

I don't want it shutdown. I think we should be able to discuss him and anyone else. You are missing my point. Point is why the exception in this case.

 

[Ausgirl]

Yes, I just used that as an example of how things can get blown out of proportion with hindsight. As to the concerns you did raise, I'm afraid I don't take the Hicks family accusations against Hobbs seriously. If there was any truth to them, why weren't they raised at the time? And why do Amanda and Terry's son from his first marriage have a good relationship with him to the extent that they allow him access to their own children?

We could well ask the same of JKM's children, some of whom have remained in contact with him.

Or Pam herself, who stayed with the abuse for how many years? Who knows why people so often do things we ourselves would not do.

As for why concerns of abuse re Amanda weren't raised at the time - Pam says a doctor was consulted, who confirmed vaginal trauma in 1993. Granted, she has not produced documents and I am not aware of any mandatory reports to police (if those existed in AR in 1993, I have no idea), so I can't say for certain it happened - but it's a pretty lie, if it didn't. Made before a judge, so some pretty big perjury as well.

So is the one told by Pam's sister, who walked in on an event that can only be described as flagrant sexual abuse. Can't remember if that went into evidence, but it was a pretty convincing story, plainly told and typical of molester behaviour. Another outrageous lie, if not true.

If none of these things are true, and Pam & co are out for Hobbs' blood in some bizarre and delayed-reaction bid for revenge, then I am happy to drop my suspicions, which I don't enjoy having or thinking about, particularly.

But I can't be sure, so they bother me. So does Chris' behaviour toward Amanda, presently. It's not solid enough to make 'the list' (of verified or very solid circumstantial reasosn for Hobbs to be a good suspect..) but it's worth mentioning as something that personally doesn't sit quite right.

Yes, things can and do get blown out of proportion, no argument there (the masturbation, I agree, is an example of that - probably). But where kids are concerned, I tend to prefer erring on the side of caution and concern for their welfare.

It's fine if we don't agree.

 

[Cappuccino]

If we leave aside that we're talking about Terry Hobbs for a minute and look at it strictly objectively, there are a few things about the accusations of sexual abuse which make me think false accusation.

1) They all seemed to surface during or after a messy divorce with child custody issues, despite the people involved claiming to have known about them before.

2) The now adult children who are supposed to have been molested have a good relationship with the alleged molestor, even allowing him access to their own children.

3) The use of hypnotism on Amanda Hobbs to produce allegations against her father.

4) The lack of any supporting evidence, even though if the Hicks family version of events is true, there should be medical evidence to produce.

5) With the exception of Pam Hicks, the people making these accusations have been demonstrably wrong in other claims they have made.

6) The obvious reason for the Hicks family to have one helluva grudge against TH - ie, the shooting of Jackie Hicks Jr. which subsequently led to his death.

I can believe all kinds of things about TH, up to and including suspecting him of murder, but I'm not going to just give a dog a bad name and hang him. I see no evidence that Hobbs is a paedophile or that he ever sexually molested his own children.

 

[Userid]

One thing, if it's true, that makes Terry Hobbs a very viable suspect is that Pam's sister noticed after the murders that Hobbs had a shoelace missing from one of his tennis shoes. I know he owned a pair of L.A. Gear shoes, the type with two different color laces in each shoe. The problem with this revelation is that she said nothing about it until years later, 2007 I believe. I don't know if there is a way to prove this, but if it's true, I'd say it's a very big deal considering the boys were bound with shoe laces and it seems the killer may have used one of his own laces during the course of the murders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow -- what a fantastic point. That would make him a viable suspect in that it would explain how the killer would've used one of his own laces while still being able to keep his shoe on and exit the woods -- he still would have at least one lace in his shoe.

I briefly touched on this a little more in the shoelace thread, because I don't want to derail this thread.

 

[reedus23]

Another thing that struck me as wrong was that according to Jacoby, Hobbs told him Stevie was due back home at dark. This is an out right lie by one or the other.

 

[Hez]

snipped for space

Yeah, the Hicks family really hated Terry Hobbs so much that he was a pallbearer at Jackie Hicks, Jr. funeral.



http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=110864638

Maybe they were scared he would shoot another family member in the stomach if he didn't get his way? :silenced:

 

[reedus23]

I'm not sure if this is the best place for it but figured I'd post it here anyways. It's not a finished product, but here is the timeline I started putting together from:

Hobbs Statement
Hobbs Deposition
Jacoby Statement
Jacoby Affidavit
Pam Hobbs Statement
Some of my thoughts

3:00-3:30: TH home from work(Stevie supposed to be home 4:30/In & out looking for Stevie)
3:00-4:00: TH home from work

4:45: Left for work (Stopped by Moore's)
About 5:00: Left to take Pam to work (stopped by Moore's/saw Dawn)
5:00: Him and Amanda took Pam to work(stopped by Moore's)
After 5:00: Stopped by Moore's after dropping Pam off.
Unspecified time: Stopped by Moore's after dropping Pam off.

5:00 to 6:00: TH came over (saw Stevie with TH on bike)
Little after 5:00-5:30/6:00: Drove around with Amanda looking.
Unspecified time: Drove around with Amanda looking.
5:30: TH told her Moore's came by
5:30-6:00: Took Amanda home and both walked looking.
Unspecified time: Went home and him and Amanda walked looking.
5:30-6:00: TH and Amanda came over (played guitar/no search)

After 6:00: At home and Moore's came by/followed back to Moore's.
Unspecified time: At home, Moore's came by/followed back to Moore's
After 6:00: Byers came by Moore's house (TH believes he may have already called LE)
Unspecified time: Byers came by Moore's

Unspecified time or duration: Drove around more with Amanda.

Unspecified time or duration: Went to Jacoby's, dropped off Amanda, drove around with Jacoby.
Unspecified time: Took Amanda to Jacoby's. ONLY THERE MINUTES.
Unspecified time until morning: Drove around with Jacoby.

6:00-6:30: TH and Jacoby went into woods searching. (Hobbs timeline already doesn't fit within his own version of events.)

6:30-7:00: TH said Stevie supposed to be home by dark and said going home to look for Stevie. (1st 4:30, not dark. 2nd, why look at 7:00 if not supposed to be home until dark.)
6:00 to 6:30: Terry left Amanda and checked at home for Stevie.
6:00 to 7:00: Asked TH where's Stevie and said riding bike.
After 6:30: TH returned and they drove around 10-15 minutes.
6:45 or so: TH dropped Jacoby off and left alone.
Unspecified time: TH returned and Jacoby and him drove again.

8:00: Drove around with TH looking
7:45 or so: TH dropped Jacoby off and took Amanda


9:00: TH and Amanda picked up Pam
9:00: Picked up Pam
9:00: TH and Amanda picked her up but went straight to phone without telling her.
9:11: Doesn't know and doesn't care who, but someone called LE.

PLEASE TELL ME WHAT TIMES ARE WRONG. I tried to keep it as straight as I could but will be the first to admit some may be wrong.

 

[Miranda!]

Yeah, the Hicks family really hated Terry Hobbs so much that he was a pallbearer at Jackie Hicks, Jr. funeral.

Pallbearers were Brian Tramel, John McCaughey, Steve Lewis, Brandon Muse, Ben Sadler, Troy Hicks, Brice Hicks, Terry Hobbs and Toby Thorne

Worth noting that of the 9 pallbearers were all four of his brothers-in-law, and two possible cousins on his father's side. It would not be unusual for the other three to have been close friends of his.

At this time it is easy to believe that there was a degree of 'keeping up appearances'.

Also, although divorced by then or going through it, I am led to believe that Pam Hicks was doing her best to present some sort of stability for the sake of her daughter. After all she had stayed with him after the murder of her son, I was told, for Amanda's sake as the murder was enough of a trauma for her to live through.

Also, as far as I can remember, J Hicks Jr. had surgery straight after the shooting. He then had more later on. Then, some time later he had to have another operation to sort out problems caused by the previous one, or something like that. So, had he not been shot he would not have had the specific surgery that he then died from. 'Emotionally' speaking I can see why the family felt that TH had caused his death but, legally speaking, having been the cause of the initial event in a chain of events, as CR said, does not make that a 'murder'.

He also was charged for drug possesion at one point. It was when he was trying to take off with Stephen's things along with some of his stuff and Pam or one of her sisters called the police. They were only interested in drugs or guns. They found drugs.

In the time line attempt above, Jacoby conveys that he saw Stevie riding past behind Terry Hobbs as he, Jacoby, opened the door to let him in, not actually 'with' him.


http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=110864638