Holly Bobo, missing from TN 2014 discussion #2 ***ARREST***

[cluciano63]

JMO I can't think of a case where remains have been found and it has been kept secret. JMO LE would not keep it secret for the family's sake. There would have to be some other reason. But with chain of custody, all of the people involved in any removal and examination of remains, etc...I find it difficult to believe remains were found, not just indications of death, and that nothing has come out. Hopefully, if they did find remains, there were no errors made along the way that could confuse the jurors, or confuse the issue of when and where they were actually found. A cover-up of such a find, IMO, could backfire.

 

[jggordo]

I believe in this case quite possibly the manner in which Holly's remains were disrespected could cause even a seasoned LE official to take pause, and try to generalize it as being in the top two horrific cases he has seen in a long time.

It was well publicized that crime scene investigators were using "sifters" and searching in "grids" for remains. After much time, a helicopter arrived, and in doing so could have removed any of the remains to take to the state lab. Thus having a tight "chain of custody".

In my opinion LE will not release any of those details until it is necessary at trial. Other than the public's curiosity, there is no real reason to disclose that pre-trial. On the other hand the possibility of inflaming a jury pool, or public outrage further will be looked at. I feel sure that Holly's family when notified had an option or opinion as well.

JMO's

 

[Bravo]

I haven't heart about any further searches and I think the reporters in the area would know about it if it was happening. I haven't seen the locals mention it either.

I think the TBI/FBI got what they were searching for when the did the three day extensive search of his home and property.

Agree. From reports and photos we saw it appeared they knew exactly where to look on the property. We didn't see days and days of digging and sifting. Somebody knew something and talked. IMO.

 

[Bravo]

I want to go to the trial. Is that odd? I don't even live in the state, but this case has touched me, and I want to be there for some reason when the time comes.

No not all. I have attended myself. We go on behalf on the Victim and the Family.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

JMO I can't think of a case where remains have been found and it has been kept secret. JMO LE would not keep it secret for the family's sake. There would have to be some other reason. But with chain of custody, all of the people involved in any removal and examination of remains, etc...I find it difficult to believe remains were found, not just indications of death, and that nothing has come out. Hopefully, if they did find remains, there were no errors made along the way that could confuse the jurors, or confuse the issue of when and where they were actually found. A cover-up of such a find, IMO, could backfire.

I don't see how not releasing that information to the public would be considered a cover up. As long as the defense is given the discovery in due time it would not be a cover up, imo. And a cover up to me would be if LE came out and specifically said they did not find a body. They just said they weren't going to discuss the evidence found in the SW, iirc. That isn't covering up anything that I can see.

They could have found partial remains or even only small splintered bones that had been almost burned up. By this time it would be aged skeletal remains too. I don't think they would release anything either way until the anthropologist had time to examine the remains/bones and extract DNA from the bone marrow, if possible... to see if it was Holly's remains for sure.

Why do you think after three long years of always believing Holly was alive and refusing to believe any different..... that now after the search warrant and arrest of ZA the Bobos are accepting proof positive Holly is now in Heaven?

Do you think they would just take the word of LE? The very LE they thought didn't do enough early on in Holly's case?

 

[wfgodot]

JMO I can't think of a case where remains have been found and it has been kept secret. JMO LE would not keep it secret for the family's sake. There would have to be some other reason. But with chain of custody, all of the people involved in any removal and examination of remains, etc...I find it difficult to believe remains were found, not just indications of death, and that nothing has come out. Hopefully, if they did find remains, there were no errors made along the way that could confuse the jurors, or confuse the issue of when and where they were actually found. A cover-up of such a find, IMO, could backfire.

Yes, not releasing pertinent info (i.e. HAS A BODY BEEN FOUND IN THE MATTER) would be seen as deliberately confusing matters and -- well, if they got 'em any Latin in TN, anyway -- would serve as a definite obsufcation of corpus delecti.

So it's best to assume that LE in TN works within the same strictures as those in the other 49, i.e., and that a body has not been found.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I believe in this case quite possibly the manner in which Holly's remains were disrespected could cause even a seasoned LE official to take pause, and try to generalize it as being in the top two horrific cases he has seen in a long time.

It was well publicized that crime scene investigators were using "sifters" and searching in "grids" for remains. After much time, a helicopter arrived, and in doing so could have removed any of the remains to take to the state lab. Thus having a tight "chain of custody".

In my opinion LE will not release any of those details until it is necessary at trial. Other than the public's curiosity, there is no real reason to disclose that pre-trial. On the other hand the possibility of inflaming a jury pool, or public outrage further will be looked at. I feel sure that Holly's family when notified had an option or opinion as well.

JMO's

ITA! It is like they knew exactly what they were searching for and found it. In the Greone triple murder and double kidnapping case LE was there three weeks at the crime scene (home) looking for evidence and clues.

Here they were there only three days and haven't been back or the reporters would know about it and so would the locals. And we have to remember also his grandfather's land is a large tract of land. Much larger than the search area they concentrated on. If they had not found what they needed they would have widened the search area.

They found what they came to find. It only makes sense to me and the Bobo parents would never just take the word of LE..........not when it came to knowing for sure whether Holly was dead or alive. They would demand proof just like every parent would, imo.

I also agree with you. It was about the condition of Holly's body when they found it is why they refused to even discuss what they found at ZAs property and home.

Cadaver dogs can still scent out remains that are years old......even longer than three years and they were on ZAs property. That shows right there they fully expected and were looking for Holly's body.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes, not releasing pertinent info (i.e. HAS A BODY BEEN FOUND IN THE MATTER) would be seen as deliberately confusing matters and -- well, if they got 'em any Latin in TN, anyway -- would serve as a definite obsufcation of corpus delecti.

So it's best to assume that LE in TN works within the same strictures as those in the other 49, i.e., and that a body has not been found.

Not to me. A body would mean they found the body intact. There is a very good chance her body wasn't intact.

I never heard them say that they did not find a body to any of the reporters at the PC so they have not said either way.

When did they flat out say they didn't find Holly's body? They refused to comment on what was found.

imo

 

[SteveS]

"When did they flat out say they didn't find Holly's body? They refused to comment on what was found."

Absolutely true. Anyone can speculate all they want, but there's been no evidence they found a body. Nor has there been any evidence they didn't. They have no obligation to have any specific evidence, or say anything to anyone, in order to be at this point in the legal process.

Also, they can absolutely charge ZA with capital murder, yet have no body or remains. As long as they can prove a murder was committed in some way, and that he did it, they're good to go.

 

[jggordo]

I believe LE found "proof of death" in their searches. I don't know what is so hard to understand. LE owes absolutely no explanation to the public in regard to Holly's remains. There are some states (KS) that do not release that information unless it has to do with "public safety". A kid was murdered in Desoto KS 10/30/2013. His COD or autopsy results STILL have not been released, and won't until trial.

Also it is quite possible that the photos and such may only be shown to the jurors, with the public never seeing them. LE gives the victims families a lot more reverence when it comes to the gore of some of the crimes. To me it's too bad that the public does not get that too. JMO

 

[SteveS]

I believe LE found "proof of death" in their searches.

Yep, there's no question they found (at the very least, what they regard as) proof of death. That's not something we even have to debate. Without that, they cannot legally arrest ZA on a charge of murder.

But that's a different issue from whether they found a body, or remains. They need not have found either a body or remains. Their legal issue is that at a point in time, ZA (solely or jointly with others) made her dead, not what happened to the body after he did so, and they have what they consider to be proof of that deed.

 

[Foxfire]

I believe LE found "proof of death" in their searches. I don't know what is so hard to understand. LE owes absolutely no explanation to the public in regard to Holly's remains. There are some states (KS) that do not release that information unless it has to do with "public safety". A kid was murdered in Desoto KS 10/30/2013. His COD or autopsy results STILL have not been released, and won't until trial.

Also it is quite possible that the photos and such may only be shown to the jurors, with the public never seeing them. LE gives the victims families a lot more reverence when it comes to the gore of some of the crimes. To me it's too bad that the public does not get that too. JMO

RE: His COD or autopsy results STILL have not been released, and won't until trial.

jggordo, although I agree with most of your post. The COD and autopsy results are withheld from the public in many murder investigations. Yet, it is rare for investigators to refuse to release info as to remains being located, imo.

Holly Bobo investigation; search of Zachary Adams property;
http://www.wmctv.com/story/24851937/search-warrants-executed-in-holly-bobo-case

In the search video(link above) of ZA's property where the sifting of the dirt is taking place over the blue tarp. A T probing rod can be observed being used by one of the members of the forensic team. Imo, once K9s had indicated a grave site, a Labrador (LABRADOR – light-weight analyser for buried remains and decomposition odor recognition, based on specific chemical compounds found relevant to human decomposition)would have been used for verification prior to using the probing rod. The use of the probing rod indicates that remains were located, jmho..

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/231197.pdf

Document Title: A New Forensics Tool: Development of an
Advanced Sensor for Detecting Clandestine Graves

FINAL REPORT Grant/Award Number: 2007-DN-R-104

Arpad Vass, Ph.D. (PI)
Life Sciences Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Cyril V. Thompson, M.S.
Chemical Sciences Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Marc Wise, Ph.D.
Chemical Sciences Division
Oak Ridge National Laboratory

 

[cluciano63]

Yep, there's no question they found (at the very least, what they regard as) proof of death. That's not something we even have to debate. Without that, they cannot legally arrest ZA on a charge of murder.

But that's a different issue from whether they found a body, or remains. They need not have found either a body or remains. Their legal issue is that at a point in time, ZA (solely or jointly with others) made her dead, not what happened to the body after he did so, and they have what they consider to be proof of that deed.

I agree they are certain she is dead and that Za killed her...but again, I cannot recall a case where remains were found and not reported openly. Finding of any remains requires a whole lot of special personnel, IMO and I cannot recall if we heard about MI's or Coroners being on scene. Maybe they were. I just find it difficult to believe that remains were found and the press did not get wind of it or that there would be a need to hide this. But am also anxious as to what convinced the family she is dead, as that is rare, without remains. Possibly a large amount of blood. JMO

 

[jggordo]

There is one thing I don't understand though. How can the same DA that reduced or dismissed previous charges against ZA over the past years be the same one to be trusted to prosecute him now. How can he do that? Just wondering and JMO.

 

[SteveS]

I agree they are certain she is dead and that Za killed her...but again, I cannot recall a case where remains were found and not reported openly.

What may or may not have happened in other cases doesn't tell us what they did or didn't find.

Simply put, we don't know what we don't know. Is it possible they found something? Sure. Is it possible they didn't? Sure. Our lack of knowing doesn't tell what we don't know. And we'll know when we know.

 

[goldiegirl]

Even the Bobo's are no longer putting up fliers nor are there any more searches by those who have searched for Holly.. I think they know its over and Holly is in Heaven. For the first time ever in three long years the Bobo's have NOW resigned themselves into believing Holly is now dead.

Imo, that can only be because the TBI/FBI has found concrete evidence that she has indeed been murdered. I have kept up with so many case like the Bobo parents find themselves in and the only way they ever believed their child was really dead is to know that the body or partial remains of their loved one had been recovered. Until that time even though murder charges may have been filed they do not let go of that hope that maybe LE is wrong and their loved one is alive somewhere.

They do not have to release this information to the public. The only ones that needs to know is the Bobo family and imo they do. They will have a memorial service for her at some point in time so those who loved Holly and the community who poured out their hearts and time searching for her can pay their final respects.

I don't think the DA is hiding it. He just doesn't have to release it and then knowing if he did he will have to answer a barrage of gruesome questions by reporters asking him about the condition of the remains when found. It spares the family for now by not releasing the condition of Holly when found. They will go through enough pain at trial when they have to sit there and hear ever brutal detail.

The biggest piece of evidence in any case is the body of the victim. And I have never known of a DA to consider the death penalty right off the bat when there wasn't a body recovered or at least partial remains or even brain matter found.

Whether they found her intact or partial remains (such as bone, brain matter,tissue etc.) I do believe they have found some part of her.

JMO though

OH! I took the question to be whether or not they were still looking for "Holly" as in her remains. Yes, I absolutely agree that they have all come to the conclusion that she is deceased. Of course they are no longer looking for HER. I thought someone was asking whether or not we had heard about anymore searches for the body. I misunderstood.

 

[~n/t~]

OH! I took the question to be whether or not they were still looking for "Holly" as in her remains. Yes, I absolutely agree that they have all come to the conclusion that she is deceased. Of course they are no longer looking for HER. I thought someone was asking whether or not we had heard about anymore searches for the body. I misunderstood.

Yes that was my original question. We don't know whether they found her body, remains nor what was found to absolutely convince the family she is deceased.

I'm going to guess they may have found some of her remains and that is the reason they went with first degree murder and possible DP in this case.

That said, if they only found parts of her remains and Holly was my daughter, I'd want them to continue looking for her.

I'm with Cluciano on this. I have never come across a case when a body or remains of the deceased kidnapped victim was found and not disclosed to the public. Never.

That was why I asked the question and I'm wondering if this will be a case based solely on circumstantial evidence. I hope NOT.

 

[masootz]

Yes that was my original question. We don't know whether they found her body, remains nor what was found to absolutely convince the family she is deceased.

I'm going to guess they may have found some of her remains and that is the reason they went with first degree murder and possible DP in this case.

That said, if they only found parts of her remains and Holly was my daughter, I'd want them to continue looking for her.

I'm with Cluciano on this. I have never come across a case when a body or remains of the deceased kidnaped victim was found and not disclosed to the public. Never.

That was why I asked the question and I'm wondering if this will be a case based solely on circumstantial evidence. I hope NOT.

two possibilities:

1) they could have evidence indicating they won't find a body (disposed of in a manner to preclude finding any remains)

2) they could have enough evidence for a likely conviction without a body and are hoping the discovery phase of the case might open opportunities for finding the body (i.e. - they've searched everywhere and are hoping something that comes up during pre-trial will give them more places to look).

it could be neither of these but i wouldn't be surprised if it was #2. i also do not think they've found any remains or the family would be preparing a memorial. i've never heard of a case where remains were found and that information wasn't made public.

 

[~n/t~]

What may or may not have happened in other cases doesn't tell us what they did or didn't find.

Simply put, we don't know what we don't know. Is it possible they found something? Sure. Is it possible they didn't? Sure. Our lack of knowing doesn't tell what we don't know. And we'll know when we know.

That's fine but this is a discussion board and we theorize based on what we do know.

We don't know they found her. We only know she is deceased. If they haven't found her, I'd want them to continue searching even if it takes years.

 

[~n/t~]

two possibilities:

1) they could have evidence indicating they won't find a body (disposed of in a manner to preclude finding any remains)

2) they could have enough evidence for a likely conviction without a body and are hoping the discovery phase of the case might open opportunities for finding the body (i.e. - they've searched everywhere and are hoping something that comes up during pre-trial will give them more places to look).

it could be neither of these but i wouldn't be surprised if it was #2. i also do not think they've found any remains or the family would be preparing a memorial. i've never heard of a case where remains were found and that information wasn't made public.

So your # 1 is circumstantial evidence correct? I'm hoping it's #2