Viable suspect: Terry Hobbs #1

[primitivefuture]

Hobbs wanted Byers to change his description of his movements that night in order for it to mesh with Hobbs' and thus back up the latter's alibi etc!

Okay, thanks! That's what I thought you meant, but I wasn't positive. I wanted to clear it up also because it looked like Udb thought you were referring to Jacoby.

Was it Byers who told you that Hobbs tried to convince him to say they met earlier in the evening? If you don't mind my asking...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[reedus23]

Okay, thanks! That's what I thought you meant, but I wasn't positive. I wanted to clear it up also because it looked like Udb thought you were referring to Jacoby.

Was it Byers who told you that Hobbs tried to convince him to say they met earlier in the evening? If you don't mind my asking...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This, if true, is pretty damning. If Byers has confirmed that this occurred, I can't think of one reason Byers would have to make it up.

 

[Graznik]

About the badgering, Byers states something along those lines in his statement from 2009 available at Callahans.

 

[primitivefuture]

About the badgering, Byers states something along those lines in his statement from 2009 available at Callahans.

Thank you. So much information, it's hard to keep it all straight sometimes.

from JMB's declaration:

19. Several years ago, I was talking to Hobbs and he made the statement that we had met for the first time around 6:00 PM on May 5, 1993. I told him that no, it was around 8:00 PM. He became enraged and started yelling, "it was 6:00 PM, it was 6:00 PM." I believe he was trying to convince me that it was 6:00 PM so that he would have an alibi, and the fact that I knew that he was lying sent him into a rage.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Miranda!]

So the 'hectoring' that you are talking about is hearsay from someone that you know who was told about the 'hectoring' and now you are telling us here about it. I guess that's why it wasn't in Jacoby's statements or that it couldn't be linked to.

No. I was told about it by the person being 'nagged' and it was also confirmed by his wife who witnessed it. So no tertiary hearsay involved here. I think it was also on a recording of a telephone conversation made about 5 years ago and the voices were recognisable as well as being identified in the course of the conversation. If the tape is no longer accesssable then it is, in legal terms, 'hearsay' I am saying and you and other readers here are hearing!

Jacoby was not involved with this at all, so do not get where that is coming from.

Anyway, when might it have been, that day, that you think Jacoby might have seen the boys other than the within the time frame as given in his declaration?

 

[UdbCrzy2]

This is Regina Meeks depo. So at 8pm he is speaking with Officer Moore.

Q What do you recall about your conversation with
8 Officer Moore while you were there with Ms. Moore?
9 A I explained to him that I was down here on one
10 juvenile missing and I discovered there were three
11 juveniles missing. I was taking a report on two of them.
12 I asked him to go to the third residence and make contact
13 with the parents and see if that child was missing and
14 if that child was missing if he could take a report.
15 Q When you say third residence, are you talking
16 about the home of Terry Hobbs?
17 A I guess so, yes, ma'am.
18 Q It's the home where Stevie Branch lived?
19 A Yes, where Steve Branch lived.
20 Q Anything else you can recall about your
21 conversation with Officer Moore at that time?
22 A Not at that time.
23 Q What is your understanding of what Officer Moore
24 did after you and Ms. Moore gave him the address of the
25 residence where Stevie Branch lived?
1 A I was finishing the report for Ms. Moore when
2 Officer Moore came back and said that the mother was at
3 work and that the stepfather was at home and that he
4 didn't know where his child was either.
5 So I asked Officer Moore if he would mind going to
6 the mother's place of employment, which was I believe
7 Catfish Island, and take a report for the third child. And
8 I had already broadcast the information and descriptions of
9 the two children, but we needed further information for the
10 third child.
11 Q Would you expect Officer Moore to have
12 documented an incident report or otherwise his
13 conversation with Stevie Branch's stepfather at Stevie
14 Branch's home?
15 A Not normally.
16 Q Because?
17 A Normally we're there on the initial call and
18 unless it becomes an issue later we would take the
19 information from the reporter, which would have been the
20 mother. She was the one filing the report. So the
21 information she gave would be in that report.
22 Q And, again, I know that your times are
23 approximate, but would this be sometime likely between
24 8:00 and 9:00 p.m., maybe 8:30 and 9:00 p.m.?
25 A Yes, ma'am. The offense reports -- if you had a
1 copy of the offense reports it reflects the exact times we
2 take the reports so that the three different reports would
3 have three different times on them.

http://callahan.8k.com/hobbs_pasdar/r_meek_depo.pdf

 

[Miranda!]

This is Regina Meeks depo. So at 8pm he is speaking with Officer Moore.

Yes, it is Meeks' depo for the Pasdar civil action which Terry Hobbbs brought.

She, officer Meek, attended the home of the Byers family to take a report of a missing boy. Mrs. Moore saw officer Meek there and went over and reported her son missing too. I seem to remember that she had gone looking to see if she could see her son and went by the Hobbs' home. Terry Hobbs then followed her back, in convey I think, and then remained in his truck as he saw Mrs Moore go across to the Byer home and report her son missing as well.

Although Mr Hobbs has oftentimes asserted that he had reported his step son as missing, it was during Officer Meek taking the reports for Chris Byers and Michael Moore, that the wmpd had the first log of boys being missing. It seems that Hobbs exited his truck and approached the Byers home as Officer Meek was pulling out. He did not take the opportunity to report his step son missing.

As to Officer Meek claiming that it was 'the mother' who reported the boy missing as to why Officer Moore did not log his alleged visit to the Hobbs' home and speak to the step-rather, fails to shock me. I have got to the stage where I have developed immunity to the duplicitous behaviour of the wmpd.

It was Terry Hobbs who made that telephone call from Catfish Island to the wmpd. He did this before telling his wife that there son was missing. He then listened as he let his wife make the formal report to Officer Moore, I believe.

I would be very grateful if you could respond to my original question of when, on that grim day, you think Jacoby might have seen the boys other than when he says he did?


'To hector' is a lovely word. To 'bully' always suggests to me that the one being bullied is a weaker person than the bully. To hector suggests the weaker person is doing the hectoring, but keeping a relatively safe distance. This distinction is merely my own interpretation, gleaned from the context in which I have read it being used.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I would be very grateful if you could respond to my original question of when, on that grim day, you think Jacoby might have seen the boys other than when he says he did?

I didn't think Jacoby was clear on that from what I've read and from the previously posted messages in this thread. You can interpret your way and I will go by what the statement actually says by reading it.

There were by the way other sightings of the boys. One off hand is Bryan Woody claims to have seen the boys near RobinHood park at around 6:45 if I recall. It's at Callahans if you are really interested in seeing it.

This is beginning to remind me of the fb page terry hobbs did it. Nothing factual and much bull.

 

[kyleb]

One off hand is Bryan Woody claims to have seen the boys near RobinHood park at around 6:45 if I recall.

Yeah, Byran Woody suggested he saw them at the southern edge of Robin Hood at around 630 -6:45, Cynthia Rico reported that around 6:00 to 6:30 she saw the boys near the northern edge of Robin Hood, and other witnesses put the boys in the same general area earlier, including Diane Moore who testified:

Q: Later did you see him with somebody else besides Steve Branch?
A: Yes, sir. Chris Byers.
Q: Where did you see them at that time?
A: Going north on 14th Street.
Q: Were they walking or – -
A: They were riding their bikes.
Q: How many bikes were there?
A: There was two bikes.
Q: Who was on what bike?
A: Michael was on his. Chris was on Steve’s, and Steve was on his.
Q: So Chris and Steve were on the same bicycle?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: How far down were they from where you were?
A: Approximately six houses.
Q: What time of the day was it?
A: Six o’clock.

Also, there's this from Mark Byers 5/19 interview which corroborates Dana's account:

Dana said, Dana then told me, she said, well around 6:15, 6:20, she said, i was walking our dog around the block. And she said, i saw Michael riding his bike. Stevie was on his bike and Christopher was on the back of the bike with Stevie. And Dana said, just about halfway down the street here, looks like Christopher's skateboard. And sure enough, it was his skateboard.

While on the other hand, none of the witnesses who came forward back then suggested the the boys were far further south near Hobbs' house or even headed in that direction around 6:00-6:30 as those who reported nothing of the sort until a decade and a half later have suggested. Also, Byers statement continues:

So then, the police officer, if I'm not mistaken, asked Dana, you know, how long have you been looking for your little boy. And she told her, you know, well, for the last hour and a half. And she said the branch, uh, Stevie branch, which his, you know, mr. Hobbs, she said, terry, which is Stevie's daddy has been looking for his since about 5 o'clock. 4:30, 5 o'clock. And she said, i saw Christopher with 'em at 6:30. So we're thinking, well, they're around the neighborhood here. All three of them together.

So while Byers doesn't recall talking to Hobbs about the boys being missing before 8:00 now, he did at least confirm that Hobbs had identified Stevie as missing well before that back then.

 

[Miranda!]

I didn't think Jacoby was clear on that from what I've read and from the previously posted messages in this thread. You can interpret your way and I will go by what the statement actually says by reading it.

Fair enough. The consensus is that his statements of that afternoon / evening were sequential/chronological.

You disputed that but are not willing to state your opinion as to when he might have meant. I would agree that the options were limited.

Either he saw them during the day whilst they were at school and he was at work. Highly unlikely.

Or he saw them later that evening, maybe when out with Hobbs, and either had a hand in the murders; witnessed the murderes; or assisted in a 'cover up'. This is a criminal offence in UK (Obstruction of Justice).

I quite understand how you were loath to respond, especially if you are NON and of the belief that the State of Arkansas released three 'child killers, one from Death Row', who were are guilty.

There were by the way other sightings of the boys. One off hand is Bryan Woody claims to have seen the boys near RobinHood park at around 6:45 if I recall. It's at Callahans if you are really interested in seeing it.

I do hope you are not sugggesting here that I might not be interested. I do not recognise your handle and thus have no idea how long you have been interested and actively posting on this case.

'Justice' is, for me, a serious matter and, as such, I use my given name where ever I have posted. You are not to know this if here is the only board you interact on and you do not read at any others.


Meanwhile, I hope everyone has a very happy Christmas.

 

[Miranda!]

In response to your last post above mine above! The fact that the parents had an idea the three were together, and Dana Moore told Byers that Hobbs had told her that, is not disputed. However, that does not mean that Hobbs told Byers anything whotsoever prior to after he (Byers) reported Christopher as missing. How you can equate Dana Moore repeating what Hobbs had tod her and transpose it to mean Byers and Hobbs talked / met etc prior to time just after MPR was made by Byers, is absolutely beyond me.

Of course Byers is 'unable' to recall an event that did not happen!

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The deposition of TH in the Pasdar case is so long that some things are simply passed over unwittingly, like this gem:

Q. Did you ever tell anybody that you thought it was something that got out of hand?
A. I don’t remember that.
Q. Do you remember telling anybody that you didn’t think people could handle the truth of what happened?
A. I don’t recall that.
Q. You don’t recall that?
A. Huh-uh.
Q. If somebody testified that you said that, would they be lying?
A. I’m not sure.

We have discussed in other places the possibility that the first murder was an accident (possibly discipline carried too far). From this quote in the Pasdar deposition and TH's reaction (his standard "I don't recall"), it seems to me that this is, indeed, a possibility. Thoughts?

 

[kyleb]

I think it's absurd to expect anyone to express certainty in response to such vague questions.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I think it's absurd to expect anyone to express certainty in response to such vague questions.

That's not vague. It is a direct question. Yes or no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Compassionate Reader]

The repeated use of "I don't recall" and "I don't remember" and "a bunch of garbage" and other choice phrases are typical, IMO, of a guilty person desperately trying to keep from incriminating himself. It simply boggles the mind to believe otherwise, IMO. I'm not sure if he answered one question directly, other than his name and other "safe" questions. The difference between the Pasdar deposition and the wmpd interview are, IMO, very revealing. Again, I bring up my lingering question, "Why did the wmpd have to protect TH, as he claimed to Jacoby and others?"

 

[Ausgirl]

I was actually under the impression that he was instructed to take that tactic by his legal counsel...

To be fair, it would be the smart thing to do, seeing that -any- thing he said up there is public record, forever. And even innocent men can say the most incriminating of things, if they're being eyeballed for a crime and aren't watching how they phrase things.

I loathe the man. But in this instance, I can see method to his behaviour that isn't necessarily suspicious. More just.. distasteful and smug. :\

 

[primitivefuture]

I was actually under the impression that he was instructed to take that tactic by his legal counsel...

To be fair, it would be the smart thing to do, seeing that -any- thing he said up there is public record, forever. And even innocent men can say the most incriminating of things, if they're being eyeballed for a crime and aren't watching how they phrase things.

I loathe the man. But in this instance, I can see method to his behaviour that isn't necessarily suspicious. More just.. distasteful and smug. :\

I'd never thought about it that way, but I agree. When I was a teenager, I lived with a bunch of friends in a big apartment that ended up burning down because our landlord was a neglectful slumlord. We did nothing to cause the fire. I almost died as a result, along with two of my roommates. A fireman did die. Even though we did nothing wrong, our lawyer instructed us to respond to any question we weren't sure of the answer with "I don't recall" or "I can't say for sure" during the lawsuit depositions. It's pretty standard. Although, I will say I'd be surprised if TH truly didn't recall the answers to some of those questions. And anyway, his answers to other questions are much more telling. And I'll never forget the creepy laugh when asked about back handing his wife.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I was actually under the impression that he was instructed to take that tactic by his legal counsel...



To be fair, it would be the smart thing to do, seeing that -any- thing he said up there is public record, forever. And even innocent men can say the most incriminating of things, if they're being eyeballed for a crime and aren't watching how they phrase things.



I loathe the man. But in this instance, I can see method to his behaviour that isn't necessarily suspicious. More just.. distasteful and smug. :\

He should have been instructed to answer truthfully. A lawyer is not supposed to encourage their client to lie under path.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kyleb]

That's not vague.

"Did you ever tell anybody" and the like is vague, the whole line of questioning giving no clue as to when and to whom Hobbs allegedly made the statements, let alone in what context, details which would aid in recollection if what was asked actually occurred.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

"Did you ever tell anybody" and the like is vague, the whole line of questioning giving no clue as to when and to whom Hobbs allegedly made the statements, let alone in what context, details which would aid in recollection if what was asked actually occurred.

No Kyle. It is a direct question. You are always saying people are not looking at facts. That is a fact. He was asked direct questions and he refused to answer them. It is yes or no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk