CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #4

[AnnaGrace]

Right, no evidence meaning something that would indicate she was there.
If they had found her hat, beer cup, a flip flop, or something she was wearing, that would confirm that she was there.
It doesn't mean they think she had never been there at all. They would need more than that, I would assume, to come to that conclusion. And if they had that evidence, I'm assuming they would be following up on whatever leads they have. Imo

No, I don't think they stopped investigating at all. I feel sure they are following up on their leads, whatever they may be. LE knows a lot that we're unaware of, as it should be. I just hope that whatever it is, it leads to BT. Imo

 

[Auntie Cipation]

Since RT hadn't yet returned to the RV while BT was there she may have done that very thing. I don't think we should assume BT never made it back to the RV unless RT is absolutely sure she did not. That's why I am wondering as to what may have been different in the the RV when RT returned. Was another beer/more water missing, BT's beer can found in the RV, her hat left there or other clothing missing from? These details are significant.

Agreed.

And I hope the searchers looked all around the exterior of the RV -- you would think they could find RT's tracks and BT's outgoing tracks at a minimum, assuming she was ever there. And her return tracks if that happened.

 

[PommyMommy]

Thank you. Unfortunately I couldn't get the link to work.
Any other links that might work for me???

Hey Snoopster! They're both working for me but I'll re-link. On the dispatch log, select "River Station" and scroll to the bottom until you see page numbers. Then go back through the page numbers until you reach July 12. (I'm not sure which link isn't working for you, so I'm including both.) MOO

Dispatch Call Log – San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department

Husband of Woman Who Vanished During Mojave Desert Hike: 'I Just Want Her Back'

 

[Jazzy5980]

bbm


If LE did not at least ask RT for permission to search the vehicles then they were derelict in their duty IMO. A warrant wouldn't have been necessary if RT consented to a search.

Of course LE should/would have searched visible structures and foundations but my question was if LE referenced maps that included mine shafts and wells that might be located within the broader area.

Buried is one thing. Having fallen in to a deep mine shaft, well or other open-hole feature is another.

I wonder if BT was still drinking from the can or was it empty and she was tired of carrying the durned thing and she wanted to get back to the RV to properly discard it in a receptacle in the RV.

I wondered if there was a note(s) that morning/previous evening if they were different in any way, such that they would indicate a change in written expression or showing of other concern as to cognitive processes, i.e., were they typical or did they indicate a diminished or altered mindset.

I never thought suicide as a possibility in this case given what we think we know. There is no indication unless we assume BT wanted not to be found after a self-inflicted demise. I have not assumed such a scenario in this case although it remains as a minuscule possibility.

My query was regarding if RT found those resources intact upon his return to the RV. Had BT arrived to the RV but then left it for whatever reason?

I was referring to if BT returned to the RV to discard her beer can in a receptacle in the RV. Was her beer can found there after her disappearance?

I wondered if the subjects/compositions of the photographs were typical or consistent with photographs taken during previous hikes. If so, why? If not, I don't see an issue.

LE, even during a traffic stop, typically asks "where are you coming from" and/or "where are you heading". I would expect LE would have had similar queries for RT. Had the T's been to somewhere previously that day where they interacted with other hikers/tourists/locals? Might someone have followed the T's without them being aware?

Searches based on consent seem straightforward but are subject to legal challenges in many cases. The attached article from the University of VA Law Review examines some of these legal pitfalls.

http://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/McGlinchy_Online (Revised).pdf

 

[Reasonable & Just]

He also had some time to look around the RV before calling 911 at 3:26pm (if the log is correct). I would think he would have mentioned that she returned to the RV if there was a sign of that. It sounds like he thinks she was snatched right after she "turned the corner" or "crossed that road". In his TV interview, he leaves a very small window of time for her disappearance. That may or may not mesh with her finding the key, entering the trailer, and then replacing the key for him to find.

 

[PommyMommy]

Good thoughts. Based on his television interview, it sounds as though he believed she was abducted very quickly (within minutes of her turning the corner). But he may not have accurately estimated the time he was taking a photo.

He was finished taking the photo when he lost sight of her. MOO

 

[rosesfromangels]

He was finished taking the photo when he lost sight of her. MOO

Apologies if this has been asked a dozen times already. Is there anything reported that states there were any cars parked within visual sight? Indicating others hiking, or lurking about?

 

[MsBetsy]

Since RT hadn't yet returned to the RV while BT was there she may have done that very thing. I don't think we should assume BT never made it back to the RV unless RT is absolutely sure she did not. That's why I am wondering as to what may have been different in the the RV when RT returned. Was another beer/more water missing, BT's beer can found in the RV, her hat left there or other clothing missing from? These details are significant.

I think from what Robert said in his interview, he thinks she never made it back to the RV. Since he went looking for her, and he mentioned that she "would have had to cross that road," he believes she never made it back.

Whether or not LE found any evidence that this was not the case, we don't know. But Robert seemed to be sure, if that's what you are asking. Imo

 

[LAhiker]

Apologies if this has been asked a dozen times already. Is there anything reported that states there were any cars parked within visual sight? Indicating others hiking, or lurking about?

I think he said that when they took a 360 degree photo earlier that day, they could see a parking area with cars -- I just asked about this upthread. I don't think he mentioned other cars at the Kelbaker Rd/Hidden Hill turnout, and I'm sure that he never mentioned any other hikers. MOO

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Searches based on consent seem straightforward but are subject to legal challenges in many cases. The attached article from the University of VA Law Review examines some of these legal pitfalls.

http://www.virginialawreview.org/sites/virginialawreview.org/files/McGlinchy_Online (Revised).pdf

I do not fully agree with the author in the context of this case, claiming that "consent" should be challenged due to possible coercion or pressure from LE. As citizens are we not expected to 'know the law' since we are held to account if we go against the law?

Why isn't it a same expectation when it comes to citizens agreeing/consenting to search? We are not permitted to argue the fact that we "did not know the law" so why should it be permitted for a defense to argue against the validity of a defendant's having given consent to search?

I know, my above argument seems to counter due process, which I agree it might but that does not diminish the seemingly hypocritical application of the spirit of law regarding this case. If RT had given consent to search could it not be argued it would have been in his best interest to have done so, akin to a 'due process' to exonerate?

Yep, I'm reaching, but I consider it valid argument.

 

[PommyMommy]

Apologies if this has been asked a dozen times already. Is there anything reported that states there were any cars parked within visual sight? Indicating others hiking, or lurking about?

No apologies. Nothing from MSM; we heard about the vehicles in the parking area from dbdb11 as told to him via text message from his sister who was present when RT spoke to Barbara's brother on speakerphone. I don't think we've heard about other hikers or anyone else around. MOO

 

[Reasonable & Just]

Reposting from page 1 to remember details.

RT's Interviews

 

[katydid23]

Thank you. Unfortunately I couldn't get the link to work.
Any other links that might work for me???

It worked for me. It says 'no results found' until you click on the window for the County Name.

 

[wary]

Apologies if this has been asked a dozen times already. Is there anything reported that states there were any cars parked within visual sight? Indicating others hiking, or lurking about?

Absolutely nothing.

We did hear that they had hiked to the top of a hill and taken a ‘360’ photo that included a parking lot with several cars in it. From the way it was phrased, I believed that it was not visible from where they were parked, and might have been at a considerable distance.

No mention of other people on the trail, no mention of other vehicles where they were parked.

 

[MsBetsy]

No, I don't think they stopped investigating at all. I feel sure they are following up on their leads, whatever they may be. LE knows a lot that we're unaware of, as it should be. I just hope that whatever it is, it leads to BT. Imo

Oh I'm sure they haven't stopped investigating.
I just meant that if they have solid evidence that she was never at that location, they would be following up with that. That would mean that RT has no credibility, and he would clearly be a suspect.

It would also change the course of the investigation to a criminal one, I would think.

Yet we have had no statements from them and nothing at all has been reported. It is still a missing persons investigation. It's possible that they have no leads at all.

The media seems to have little interest in this case. If only they would ask some questions, maybe we would have an update from LE.
I know that the family is trying to get the media to take interest, and I hope it works. Imo

 

[10ofRods]

Since RT hadn't yet returned to the RV while BT was there she may have done that very thing. I don't think we should assume BT never made it back to the RV unless RT is absolutely sure she did not. That's why I am wondering as to what may have been different in the the RV when RT returned. Was another beer/more water missing, BT's beer can found in the RV, her hat left there or other clothing missing from? These details are significant.

Yes, they are, but we don't know them. RT did not spend his 10 minutes of Inside Edition addressing issues like that. We don't know why he says he looked under rocks. No mention of her beer can being in the RV, and if it was, that would mean RT fibbed to LE, as they asked him what she was wearing and carrying when last seen. If RT didn't include the fact that he had already recovered her beer can (it wasn't a can btw, it was a cooler-container of some sort), that would be obscuring a very important piece of last knowledge about his wife. It would be a huge critical thinking error, pointing to some cognitive deficits in RT, IMO.

So, can we assume that any caves, wells or abandoned mine shafts in the area were known and searched by SAR?

Yes, within a nearby radius (they tweeted picture of the very cave that RT said he and BT both knew about, as well as some other crevices/caves). There are some other caves to the northeast, but they are more than 7 miles away. They are also very frequently visited by spelunkers and hikers. I do not know if any posters have been put up in those caves, LE probably thinks it's impossible that she could have gotten that far.

Locals said early on that there are no mine shafts close by the disappearance point. Also, I don't think she was going to go hiking cross country with bare legs...if she was, then she was not in her right mind and already very much in the throes of hyperthermia.

The pretty flowers in the background are not flowers, those are cholla:

Imgur

 

[katydid23]

From what I’ve seen, they do both concurrently. They send specialists to search terrain like that and investigate at the same time. Within a couple of days we hear RT has been interrogated, polygraphed, and according to VI handed his phone in.

They do it somewhat concurrently. The detectives aren't out searching, they are looking for quick leads, and talking to the last people with her, etc.

But LE puts the vast majority of their manpower into the searches in the first 4 or 5 days, in case she is lost or injured, and able to be recovered.

After that, they probably won't search anymore until they have solid leads about where to find her remains.

 

[AnnaGrace]

Oh I'm sure they haven't stopped investigating.
I just meant that if they have solid evidence that she was never at that location, they would be following up with that. That would mean that RT has no credibility, and he would clearly be a suspect.

It would also change the course of the investigation to a criminal one, I would think.

Yet we have had no statements from them and nothing at all has been reported. It is still a missing persons investigation. It's possible that they have no leads at all.

The media seems to have little interest in this case. If only they would ask some questions, maybe we would have an update from LE.
I know that the family is trying to get the media to take interest, and I hope it works. Imo

It's one of the cases that make you go hmmm and keeps you guessing. I'd love to see the media pick it up and an update from LE would be wonderful even if it was just a tidbit. At least we'd know they're working on it. I really feel bad for her family. As it is, their loved one is gone and there's no answers for them. That's got to be so hard to endure.

 

[10ofRods]

...

bbm


If LE did not at least ask RT for permission to search the vehicles then they were derelict in their duty IMO. A warrant wouldn't have been necessary if RT consented to a search.

(snipped by me to answer a couple of questions, don't have answers to all)



LE, even during a traffic stop, typically asks "where are you coming from" and/or "where are you heading". I would expect LE would have had similar queries for RT. Had the T's been to somewhere previously that day where they interacted with other hikers/tourists/locals? Might someone have followed the T's without them being aware?

Well, since they took him in for a polygraph, of course they asked him all those kinds of questions.

And yes, in principle they could have searched the truck and trailer without a warrant. But at the point they asked him to leave, I do not think he was yet a suspect per se. And to be quite honest, if they were beginning to suspect him (as he says they were), then it would have been best, by far, for them to get a warrant. Zeroing in on one person, asking a distraught elderly man for permission to search his vehicle...is a defense attorney's gold mine.

 

[Gigi3]

You know, I was thinking about this too. I fall asleep every night to a crime podcast (embarrassing!). But the difference is that man, most of those perps (not all, granted, and hindsight is always such a great thing) are so sketchy. It’s, I came home and my wife was gone, but stuff in the house and car have been cleaned furiously, or other implausible stories. This one, doesn’t go there yet for me. Until we get more info, of course.

LOL!! Don’t be embarrassed- I do the exact same! In the car, doing housework, etc. I even have a true crime nonfiction unit as an elective for my students I agree that we really don’t have a lot of information to go off of, but the length of time between him putting the camera away and her vanishing is so perplexing to me. However, stranger things have happened! MOO