CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #6

[CSIDreamer]

This side by side tells me that the picture with the red hat was probably made that day.

First pic being a very recent clear picture of Barbara, chosen because it represents her the best. Maybe also because of the flamingo blouse, perhaps she was wearing that blouse prior to wearing a bikini, she wears the blouse on a pic that to me seems 10 years old also, for wearing it in different pics over a 10 year time span, maybe it was her favorite and the one she was wearing that morning too. Who knows.
Second one, pic from that day.

Reason, Barbara is wearing the same earrings in both, while if you look at the pictures provided by VI, she changed earrings (and bikinis, and caps) all the time, different earrings in every picture.

You will have to watch closely since in the bikini pic you only see the light on the earring that gives away its specific form, due to the side by side you can conclude it being the same (they are not round but have a specific shape, I have a better close up of the earrings).

;An older picture of Barbara in the same bikini, possible, an older picture of Barbara wearing the same bikini and same cap, possible, an older picture of Barbara wearing the same bikini, same cap, in the desert in front of a rock formation, around the same time of day, wearing the same earrings as in her most recent picture, I think the likelyhood of that is maybe zero. IMO

Does anyone here on this board has two pictures of him/herself made years in between, wearing the exact same outfit, same jewelry, cap, posing on the same time of day in front of the same kind of background?

A lot of people wear earrings more than once. That's a lot to base something on unless you have inside information. At which point, it would be useful to get verified.

 

[Micheline]

A lot of people wear earrings more than once. That's a lot to base something on unless you have inside information. At which point, it would be useful to get verified.

I made a whole list of things, the earrings I noticed today, and makes the list even longer.

Not that it matters anymore, since it already has been confirmed that there is evidence in pictures she was there where RT said she was, when RT said she was.

 

[Micheline]

-snipped for content-

How can we know what time of day, or year in the pic if we don't know when the pic was taken which is published in media? It seems assumptions are being made.

Time of day- Last seen when the sun was at its highest.
Shade in bikini pic shows it was made with sun at its highest.

Time of year- Ppl wear a bikini or alike garment outdoors in summertime only.
In bikini pic the sun is straight above Barbara, the sun at such a high point does not happen in Spring or Autumn.
IMO

 

[HongKongPhooey]

-snipped for content-



Time of day- Last seen when the sun was at its highest.
Shade in bikini pic shows it was made with sun at its highest.

Time of year- Ppl wear a bikini or alike garment outdoors in summertime only.
In bikini pic the sun is straight above Barbara, the sun at such a high point does not happen in Spring or Autumn.
IMO

Agree you can make assumptions on the time of day. Not sure about time of year, guess warm weather lasts a lot longer in that part of the world than it does here in the UK!

Still no confirmation though AFAIK re the crucial question..

What DATE was the photo taken?

 

[Micheline]

-Snipped a bit for content-

Not sure about time of year, guess warm weather lasts a lot longer in that part of the world than it does here in the UK!

In the Northern hemisphere it is only possible to stand straight under the sun at its highest point around June 21 around 12.30:

 

[Tillicum]

Quote from PommyMommy on media thread AZ - AZ - Barbara Thomas, 69, Timeline, Media, Maps, *NO DISCUSSION*

JUL 19, 2019
Video: Husband of missing 69-year-old hiker says police consider him a suspect

• SBCSO says they are not releasing any information about the missing person investigation and interviews with family members.
• Authorities also say they have no evidence the woman was abducted nor have they found any trace of her.
• Rescuers resumed the search at daybreak using off-road vehicles, K9 units, hikers, and aerial support.
• Authorities are unaware of how long RT and BT were separated before she disappeared nor do they know how far she was from the RV at the time.
• Officials also say that they are unaware of any medical conditions that may have caused BT to become disoriented or lost.

BBM According to our VI, RT was questioned for 5 hours by LE on the day Barbara disappeared. Seven days later and LE still doesn't know this relevant information? IMO either LE is totally inexperienced and doesn't know how to conduct a missing person investigation OR LE does not believe the information RT gave them during that 5 hours of questioning. IMO if LE does have photos proving Barbara was there that day, the time stamp of those photos doesn't prove the timeline given by RT.

 

[Reasonable & Just]

Interesting. I wonder why people keep referring to a "Websleuth member" when it was the VI when they mention BT's demeanor at the kennel?

Incorrect info or info from outside sources is mistakenly posted, then reposted and errors amplify. I've been reading long enough to know that happens and not be too mystified by it. However, it is very confusing when someone repeatedly posts as though they have inside information but don't become VIs or answer questions about their info, so I'm alerting a mod so the VI process can hopefully start.

 

[RANCH]

Incorrect info or info from outside sources is mistakenly posted, then reposted and errors amplify. I've been reading long enough to know that happens and not be too mystified by it. However, it is very confusing when someone repeatedly posts as though they have inside information but don't become VIs or answer questions about their info, so I'm alerting a mod so the VI process can hopefully start.

Now I'm really confused. Are you saying the information about BT's demeanor at the kennel didn't come from her nephew who is the only VI on this case but someone else who is not verified?

 

[Reasonable & Just]

Now I'm really confused. Are you saying the information about BT's demeanor at the kennel didn't come from her nephew who is the only VI on this case but someone else who is not verified?

No, I am not.

 

[Stripehaven]

Even if (IF) that photo of BT is from July 12 in front of a rock formation in the desert at high noon, we still don’t have confirmation it was taken at the Kelbaker Road location. I think it’s possible they made more than one stop that day, in the same general area (say, within an hour’s radius or so).

 

[RANCH]

No, I am not.

So you are talking about some other information and not the kennel demeanor?

 

[Auntie Cipation]

@dbdb11 , for clarity please, when you say that LE has told you they have photos of Barb on the 12th, is it known with certainty if those photos are indeed at the search location?

Or could they be photos from earlier in the day, before they went on the walk? At home, along the way, or even at the parked RV? Or were they specifically from out along that trail?

Thanks if you can shed more light.

Second comment -- someone observed recently that the baseball cap in the photo looks like it has a red front panel and bill, but white panels on the side.

If true this could explain why a head-on photo shows a red cap, while anyone seeing her in profile might think of it as a white cap.

If this cap were seen on the ground I suspect both colors would be easily seen.

On the other hand there could also be two different caps.

 

[CSIDreamer]

I made a whole list of things, the earrings I noticed today, and makes the list even longer.

Not that it matters anymore, since it already has been confirmed that there is evidence in pictures she was there where RT said she was, when RT said she was.

It does kinda' matter actually. Stating speculation as fact is very confusing and not helpful.

 

[Reasonable & Just]

So you are talking about some other information and not the kennel demeanor?

No, I am not. No mention of kennels or demeanor in the very general statement about my experience reading forum threads pasted below. I hope this clears up my statement for you.

Incorrect info or info from outside sources is mistakenly posted, then reposted and errors amplify. I've been reading long enough to know that happens and not be too mystified by it.

 

[Tillicum]

Even if (IF) that photo of BT is from July 12 in front of a rock formation in the desert at high noon, we still don’t have confirmation it was taken at the Kelbaker Road location. I think it’s possible they made more than one stop that day, in the same general area (say, within an hour’s radius or so).

Agreed. Possibly just slightly out of the search area IMO.

 

[RANCH]

No, I am not. No mention of kennels or demeanor in the very general statement about my experience reading forum threads pasted below. I hope this clears up my statement for you.

Incorrect info or info from outside sources is mistakenly posted, then reposted and errors amplify. I've been reading long enough to know that happens and not be too mystified by it.

Repeating your previous post doesn't help. I give up.

 

[Cherwell]

(your bolded part snipped)

• Authorities are unaware of how long RT and BT were separated before she disappeared nor do they know how far she was from the RV at the time.

BBM According to our VI, RT was questioned for 5 hours by LE on the day Barbara disappeared. Seven days later and LE still doesn't know this relevant information? IMO either LE is totally inexperienced and doesn't know how to conduct a missing person investigation OR LE does not believe the information RT gave them during that 5 hours of questioning. IMO if LE does have photos proving Barbara was there that day, the time stamp of those photos doesn't prove the timeline given by RT.

Could it just mean that there is no independent confirmation of those two points?

 

[Cherwell]

No, I am not. No mention of kennels or demeanor in the very general statement about my experience reading forum threads pasted below. I hope this clears up my statement for you.

Incorrect info or info from outside sources is mistakenly posted, then reposted and errors amplify. I've been reading long enough to know that happens and not be too mystified by it.

I think the confusion has arisen because your original post quoted Ranch's post about the kennel.

 

[Reasonable & Just]

I think the confusion has arisen because your original post quoted Ranch's post about the kennel.

I'm very sorry. It was meant to be a general statement about confusing or contradictory info on a thread. The follow up questions were then about whether I was saying specific things about kennels or demeanor, which were not in my statement.

 

[deugirtni]

Repeating your previous post doesn't help. I give up.

Let me try to help. I was confused too, didn't know where the info about the kennel or the neighbor was coming from, and nobody seemed to reply to my request for links. I finally found where these things were coming from when I went back reading more of the back-thread(s). I still am not sure whether there was an 'initial' WS person who contacted the dog-kennel *before* our VI did, but I do know that our VI did indeed contact them and report back to us here on the thread as to what he learned from them.

Do a search on the VI's WS posts and you will become enlightened.

The other person was just saying that if someone posts an opinion as if it is fact, or posts wrong information, people read it at different times, and it multiplies exponentially into some huge, ongoing thing that keeps cropping up for ages and it's hard to make it go away. That's part of why WS doesn't allow 'rumors' on here and sources must be from MSM, LE, or VIs, else we'd be a big hot mess, not knowing fact from fiction. I think it was not clear however, which aspect she/he was referring to in this instance.