Holly Bobo, missing from TN 2014 discussion #5 ***ARRESTS***

[evelyn24]

I think that JP is alleging that there was a video involving his brother Mark's ex (another Holly) and ZA and that brother Mark filmed the encounter. It's hard to follow because of how JP worded his statement in the article linked last page but that is what I think he is saying. That some sex tape exists showing ZA in a sexual consensual encounter with his brother, Mark's ex wife who is named Holly.

I suspect, if such a video exists, that seeing a snippet of that video coupled with the long standing rumor that there was a video out there of Holly being raped after her abduction became melded in this woman's mind.

[ETA think about it. The local rumor mill has long been pumping out this business about Holly Bobo being raped and tortured on video. Then ZA and JA are arrested. And now the MSM is even beginning to discuss and hint at this rumor of the video. It is all the buzz for months after these arrests.

Then someone you know shows you a snippet of a video on their cell phone with ZA approaching some tied up blond woman named Holly ready to have sex with her and you hear MP's voice on the video (hence is the filmer). You might a) think this is THE rumored video or b) even knowing it is not, here is a way to get back at someone who has pissed you off and you really don't even have to lie.

The witness testified she saw a blond woman who resembled Holly Bobo on the tape.

I know others will disagree but that is what this is all looking like to me.

So the TBI better have something more substantial than this to convict ZA or I will lose it. Literally lose my chit. We have waited too long for justice for Holly to let it go that route.

My only question is, IF what I describe above is what happened - why does JP or MP not simply produce the video/ innocent consensual sex tape?]

I just saw a video of JP outside the court and he denies showing her a video. I also don't think Sandra King is confusing anything. She is either telling the truth or a liar.
She said she saw a blond woman crying, not enjoying sex. How can you confuse being raped vs having fun? Not buying she has melded the two (rumor of video and sex video).
I saw her testimony and she looks rough and not believable to me.
I have no idea about ZA and JA, and their charges, that still remains to be seen. I do however think the charges against Jeff and Mark Pearcy regarding the video are a nonsense and based in desperation and rumor. It's so typical of the powers that be to refuse to admit they're wrong. They're like a dog with a bone. A big *advertiser censored* dog with lots of money and resources.

 

[evelyn24]

Wouldn't the recorded phone message between Ms. King and JP... When referring to the video about Holly - and JP says "Yes"... Add to the evidence that the video may exist?

:waitasec:

Here's the line from the recorded phone conversation that is suppose to be so incriminating:

Sandra King : “I said to him, ‘You know that video of Holly, if it would have been you in that video, I would have watched it,’ and he said, ‘Yes I know,’” King said."

That could be taken a million ways. Forget sex video How about just the fact there is an ex wife Holly that a person who has know JP for almost 20 years would most likely be talking about vs some girl who was missing three years ago? Who would you automatically think someone you knew was talking about if they mentioned a name that is the same of your ex spouse?

"When Jeffrey Pearcy's attorney, Baker, questioned King, he revealed that Pearcy has an ex-wife, who also is named "Holly."

Baker argued that when King called Pearcy in the recorded call, she never said Bobo's last name, she only said "Holly," so Baker asked if she thought Pearcy may have been referring to his ex-wife when he replied."

and about the sex video stuff.

I haven't seen a video. No one has seen this video that anyone is talking about," Jeffrey Pearcy said. He questioned why King hasn't been arrested since he believes she's the only person who has seen the alleged video.

Pearcy said he's not aware of a video of Bobo or of his ex-wife tied up.

And where are all the other people that saw this video? JP picked this lady to show it too all of a sudden after three years? Why would he of all people show off a video like he's proud of it when he doesn't even hang with this bunch and doesn't have a record?

FYI.. Sandra King testifying in court:

 

[Mr. Noatak]

My opinions only, no facts here:

My analysis is that the authorities do not consider the affidavit of the main suspect's brother as sufficient by itself to obtain convictions in a jury trial. I feel that the authorities also worry that any claims from the unindicted co-conspirator (the guy who claimed to know where the body was but could NOT deliver) are questionable in court. So, my present read on this case, is that it rests entirely on the shoulders of this lady who claims to have seen a snippet of an incriminating video. My gut tells me that the authorities need a video to tie the main suspect and/or his big guy buddy to the crime, or at least need to convince a jury at some point that such video did exist in the past. Am I missing anything else here?

Forget about grand juries. They indict ham sandwiches. If grand jury indictments were guilty verdicts, there would be probably be untold tens of millions more in prison today.

I respect that some readers may think that I am being dismissive of future outcomes in this case. I return to (posted here before) the Wenatchee child abuse prosecutions which resulted in the arrests of 43 people, 29,726 charges, and with 60 purported victims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions). The entire case was likely a prosecutorial fantasy/orgy, an opportunistic whim of the paranoid times, yet some accused people eventually accepted plea agreements! Millions were eventually paid out in later years to wrongfully-convicted "suspects" in private litigation. And the private litigation costs to the State will likely increase for many years into the future.

I think that the authorities are too invested into the current Holly Bobo story to back out now. I expect some sort of 'rational' resolution to this case involving the named suspects and POI's (deaths, plea agreements, convictions, etc.). Having said all of that, I still personally feel that ONE person is responsible for the disappearance of Holly Bobo. The person who can deliver the remains is the credible person. Anybody else is a usual suspect; a fantasy; a whim.

But never forget, convictions from a trial by Jury trump all considerations, including truth. You WILL be going to prison.

Sleuth On!

 

[spooky24]

In the past, sexual predators/serial killers would take souvenirs; clothing or other items from their innocent victims enabling them to relive their heinous crimes. But 'times they are a changin'... It is not unusual, but actually common for today's sexual predators/serial killers to film their deviant acts..
jmo

Your confused. You are referring to someone in which fantasy has taken over their lives and through these items they can relive the fantasy. This level of psychosis is rare and they are known as remembrances not souvenirs. Photos or videos would not be a remembrance as they can't be felt or owned which is the motivating factor for the crime. Dalmer took thousands of Polaroids however he said that they were only used to 'tell this one from that one'-whatever you choose that means the photos were not a part of the fantasy.

The serial killer files list two individuals and one pair of individuals that filmed torture but this is 3 out of 1100 and that is about the correct ratio. These men are clearly not psychotic and the filming of a rape video has nothing whatsoever to do with fantasy remembrances collected by someone who has lost all sense of reality and can only suppress the fantasy long enough to exist in the world they must exist in.

Bundy cut the heads off his victims and kept as many as 4 at a time in his room at The Oaks. He also put makeup on them and talked to them everyday. Pictures of the heads would be meaningless-that is the best way to categorize remembrances. This also shows just how far the psychosis can go and why it is one in 20 million rare.

 

[bluenoser]

I wonder if LE has ever spoken to the ex-wife, Holly? She could clear some of this up!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Sometimes I am still amazed how some assume witnesses who come forward are lying and the defendant is telling the truth. SMH.

Why would SK lie about such a thing? By coming forth with what she had seen she put herself in a dangerous situation. And if she is lying why would she go to all the effort of having a taped conversation with Pearcy trying to get him to open up about the video that he showed her? A video he did not deny that exists btw. Saying now he couldn't understand her during the call is ridiculous. Yeah right, how convenient. Why didn't he say to her "WTH are you talking about?" "A video?" Nope he did not say that at all. He just acknowledged that he had heard what she said when she told him if the video had been of him she would have watched it and he replied "I know."

I am sure when the actual recording of the call is played for the GJ it will be very evident he understood everything just fine. And what it also shows is both of them were still on good speaking terms with each other. So she didn't come forward to get even with him about anything. And if he is so innocent then why didn't he just give them the code to begin with showing he has nothing to hide?

As far as this man having no criminal record when has that ever prevented anyone of doing something illegal/criminal or possessing something they shouldn't have had? Perhaps some of us have forgotten the countless cases discussed right here where the defendants had no past criminal history whatsoever yet did go on to commit heinous crimes. It isn't Pearcy's past history that is of importance now but what he had in his possession as late as May. Just like having no criminal history beforehand was totally irrelevant in other cases when other defendants committed criminal acts. He will not be judged on his past history but what he is being accused of now if this goes to trial if the GJ hands down an indictment.

IMO, this tape has nothing to do with the arrest and charges of ZA and JA which had already happened. Nothing shows that the DA must have this video to prove their case. Nothing. Of course if it exist and I believe it does then it will be another piece of powerful evidence used in the trial. But since they were already arrested and charged this case does not rise or fall on the video in question.

I disagree with others who assume there will be a plea deal or some other kind of resolution in the cases involving the main two perpetrators. There hasn't even been the slightest indication that is even an option being considered by the DA.

I also do not agree with those who think a GJ will indict a ham sandwich. That is spin that has been put out by defense attorneys for years and has no basis in truth. GJs often 'true bill' cases and often during the same GJ duty they 'no bill' cases as well. And if GJ just hands down indictments willy nilly then a hell of a lot more cases would wind up as NGs rather than the overwhelming amount of cases where the defendants are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt when it goes to trial or the defendant winds up pleading guilty before it goes to trial.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

My opinions only, no facts here:

My analysis is that the authorities do not consider the affidavit of the main suspect's brother as sufficient by itself to obtain convictions in a jury trial. I feel that the authorities also worry that any claims from the unindicted co-conspirator (the guy who claimed to know where the body was but could NOT deliver) are questionable in court. So, my present read on this case, is that it rests entirely on the shoulders of this lady who claims to have seen a snippet of an incriminating video. My gut tells me that the authorities need a video to tie the main suspect and/or his big guy buddy to the crime, or at least need to convince a jury at some point that such video did exist in the past. Am I missing anything else here?

Forget about grand juries. They indict ham sandwiches. If grand jury indictments were guilty verdicts, there would be probably be untold tens of millions more in prison today.

I respect that some readers may think that I am being dismissive of future outcomes in this case. I return to (posted here before) the Wenatchee child abuse prosecutions which resulted in the arrests of 43 people, 29,726 charges, and with 60 purported victims (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenatchee_child_abuse_prosecutions). The entire case was likely a prosecutorial fantasy/orgy, an opportunistic whim of the paranoid times, yet some accused people eventually accepted plea agreements! Millions were eventually paid out in later years to wrongfully-convicted "suspects" in private litigation. And the private litigation costs to the State will likely increase for many years into the future.

I think that the authorities are too invested into the current Holly Bobo story to back out now. I expect some sort of 'rational' resolution to this case involving the named suspects and POI's (deaths, plea agreements, convictions, etc.). Having said all of that, I still personally feel that ONE person is responsible for the disappearance of Holly Bobo. The person who can deliver the remains is the credible person. Anybody else is a usual suspect; a fantasy; a whim.

But never forget, convictions from a trial by Jury trump all considerations, including truth. You WILL be going to prison.

Sleuth On!

I am puzzled why you inserted cases that happened twenty years ago and were accusations about child abuse.

How is that relevant 20 years later in a case that has nothing to do with child abuse but is a case about felony kidnapping and murder of a young adult woman?

I don't expect the main perpetrators to ever deliver Holly's remains. In most of these case when the victim's remains haven't been located the perp never discloses where they discarded the remains. I don't see this case being different from most other cases. I suppose they may think if they do not give up the location of the one they murdered they somehow think that gives them an ace in the hole. But in the end, it doesn't, and DAs prove their cases with other powerful CE even if the body is never located.

In fact as I mentioned earlier I cant remember one case recently where a missing body case ended in a NG due to the body never being located. For many years it was a struggle for LE and DAs to bring the perpetrator to justice when the body had not been located. That is no longer the case. More and more citizens in our country are becoming aware how bodies can never be recovered but CE exist to prove the defendant is guilty. The cases that are won are being shown now more and more on their local and national media channels.

That is why now there is no longer a long wait to arrest the suspect police had suspected all along. We are really seeing the DAs picking up the pace in charging the defendants very quickly in missing body cases now. We are now also beginning to see DAs who are asking for the death penalty in these type of cases.

It is a new era when it comes to getting convictions where the body of the victim has never been located.

IMO

 

[tlcya]

sitting back waiting to see what they ACTUALLY have and can prove against the Pearcys. I thoroughly believe ZA is responsible for Holly's abduction and death. I am pretty confident that JA was involved. Not even close to believing that the Pearcy's have or had a video of Holly post abduction.

I am open to it being true. But not convinced yet by a long shot. It simply makes no sense to me.

No sense :deadhorse: so I will lurk, and watch and wait for something more to be released.

 

[Dogface]

I agree to a certain degree ticya about the video not making a lot of sense, however, I remind myself that criminal behavior, raping and murder make no sense to me either.

I've been trying to come up with reasons on both sides as to why or why not I think the tape exists.

Reasons why I think it might exist:
1. The simple ease of recording with a phone. People seem to record anything and everything these days, and I wouldn't look past the thought they would record this in a state of power.
2. SK doesn't appear to have a reason to come forward other than doing the right thing. And it puts her in a position of huge vulnerability by coming forward. She could be at the risk of physical harm, and if she was lying she could be in big trouble. I haven't seen evidence that she would have a vendetta against these brothers, but, that is something that could come to light.

Reasons why I think it may not exist:
1. It hasn't been seen by LE afaik.
2. No one else has come forward saying they have seen it(but if you were a criminal or a junkie relying on ZA for your fix you may not come forward ETA: even now that he is in jail they might not come forward bc of the amount of time that has passed from when they first saw it, I can't imagine someone coming forward and saying "I saw this two years ago"
3. It would have been incredibly stupid on their part to record such an act, and very ballsy to show it to anyone if they did.

I do think it's hard to apply what a normal mind would think and do to these people as they are all criminalistic and on drugs. So I will be on the fence with you until more evidence is given to us.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

sitting back waiting to see what they ACTUALLY have and can prove against the Pearcys. I thoroughly believe ZA is responsible for Holly's abduction and death. I am pretty confident that JA was involved. Not even close to believing that the Pearcy's have or had a video of Holly post abduction.

I am open to it being true. But not convinced yet by a long shot. It simply makes no sense to me.

No sense :deadhorse: so I will lurk, and watch and wait for something more to be released.

What makes no sense if I may ask?

To me it makes perfect sense.

It is quite common nowadays for criminal acts to be videoed by those who were there at the time.

I see absolutely no reason why Ms. King would make any of this up. None. She has nothing to gain by coming forward and I think the Judge realizes that all too well. In the GJ I do believe they will be able to hear all of the taped conversation she had with him about this (cough-cough) video he says now he never had.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I agree to a certain degree ticya about the video not making a lot of sense, however, I remind myself that criminal behavior, raping and murder make no sense to me either.

I've been trying to come up with reasons on both sides as to why or why not I think the tape exists.

Reasons why I think it might exist:
1. The simple ease of recording with a phone. People seem to record anything and everything these days, and I wouldn't look past the thought they would record this in a state of power.
2. SK doesn't appear to have a reason to come forward other than doing the right thing. And it puts her in a position of huge vulnerability by coming forward. She could be at the risk of physical harm, and if she was lying she could be in big trouble. I haven't seen evidence that she would have a vendetta against these brothers, but, that is something that could come to light.

Reasons why I think it may not exist:
1. It hasn't been seen by LE afaik.
2. No one else has come forward saying they have seen it(but if you were a criminal or a junkie relying on ZA for your fix you may not come forward)
3. It would have been incredibly stupid on their part to record such an act, and very ballsy to show it to anyone if they did.

I do think it's hard to apply what a normal mind would think and do to these people as they are all criminalistic and on drugs. So I will be on the fence with you until more evidence is given to us.

Great points, Dogface.

BBM

I wonder if that is really true. She is the only one that we know of that has come forward saying they have seen this video.

In going before the Judge in this hearing to see if there was probable cause to forward it on to a GJ the state would use minimal witnesses as possible and only put on what they felt they needed to prove probable cause. So I do think there may be others who have told them about the video but the DA is not going to show the defense all of their cards just to get it forwarded to a GJ..

We have to remember that the video was even asked about in February of this year by the media at the PC. THAT was before Ms. King even came forward in May. Imo, someone else had already told them they had seen the same video. Maybe not through the cell phone belonging to Pearcy but a copy forwarded to another cell phone perhaps.

I do think they have additional witnesses saying they saw the same things as Ms. King says she saw but they aren't going to reveal who all those witnesses are at this time. I think the DA was very comfortable using Ms. King's testimony to get the probable cause they needed to have it forwarded to the GJ. At the GJ since it is secretive and confidential the state may bring in more than Ms. King as a witness.

LOL! We have seen some very stupid and arrogant criminals in the past that have done the most stupidest things imaginable. It wouldn't surprise me if it has happened once again in this case.

JMO

 

[jggordo]

I believe this video issue has been a hot potato issue since just before the press conference way back. When a reporter overheard Zach's attorney asking him to confirm the rumor about the existence of a video, which was what prompted the question at the PC in the first place. The TBI fumbled the question and clumsily passed it off to the District Attorney. And he almost squinted one eye while answering IIRC. IF TBI got Zach's cellphone and opened it up without a specific SW to do it, it could quite easily be "tainted evidence" at this point, according to the Supreme Court.

However they may know who the video was "shared" with. And knowing the copy is out there and where can now get an appropriate SW for the copy and be able to then use it at trial. I do believe there is good reason why LE is making a big deal of getting Apple to get the "code" to open the phones, etc.

I think Holly's picture has been on billboards, trucks, t-shirts and flyers for years. SK knows exactly who was on the video IMO. And I think she is saying she did not watch the whole video because she doesn't want to get busted for an accessory or obstruction charge. IMO the only way the Pearcy's can say in such a definitive way that the video does not exist is to know it was destroyed.

JMO's

 

[OldSteve]

The video is a hot potato!

Not sure I would like to be on a jury and that was the only piece of evidence - just the word or one person. While it does not make sense to me that someone would like about it, it also doesn't make sense to me when people do so many other crazy things. Okay, looking at it from the point of view she is not lying; but then it becomes a question of was the video real, was it really of Holly, could SK been confused about what she saw....

 

[sophiebelle]

If the brothers had nothing to do with this, I think it takes a very sick mind to just want to view it. Why keep the video? To shock and amaze others? It's like a mob of thugs and crazies who just all hung out together for no other reason than to do/see/hear bad things. The normal mind can't comprehend it.http://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-says-she-saw-missing-tennessee-woman-holly-bobo-on-video/
I don't think that has anything new.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From WSMV:


It's always alarming when someone is arrested on federal gun charges. But when that person arrested is also a friend of the main suspect in Holly Bobo's murder, it raises a lot of questions.

The charges Robert Shawn Moody is facing are not connected to the Bobo case, but he was with Zach Adams, one of the main suspects in the case, just days before Bobo disappeared.

Moody is a man with a lengthy criminal history in Decatur and Henderson counties, including statutory rape. He's also a registered sex offender in Florida.


http://www.wsmv.com/story/26157020/friend-of-suspect-in-holly-bobo-case-facing-federal-gun-charges


RBBM: Yep ... raises LOTS of questions !

:moo:

 

[Elley Mae]

I think it did/does exist. What I have a hard time with is having a friend of 19 plus years that is in a place that showing me something like that is OK. I mean I can not imagine having a friend that would have that on their cell phone much less feeling compelled to show me and thinking it was OK. Where is someone in their mind that having footage of such and then sharing it. Boggles my mind. She said she watched for 30-40 seconds before turning away, wth. I wonder if the location was visible to SK?

 

[dog.gone.cute]

From WSMV:


Channel 4 asked the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation if Moody's arrest has anything to do with the Bobo case.

A TBI spokesperson issued this statement: "For the sake of the ongoing Holly Bobo case, we are not willing to speculate about specific individuals and whether they might be connected to the investigation."


http://www.wsmv.com/story/26157020/friend-of-suspect-in-holly-bobo-case-facing-federal-gun-charges

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Well... I wonder if JP's ex-wife, Holly (if there is such a person), would be able to corroborate that she had sex with half-brother Mark?...

an EX-wife may not want to cover his fanny... Especially if it it not the truth...kwim?

Just thinking...:waitasec:

:seeya: Good thinking ... and nice to see ya !

:waitasec: Sure would like to know IF l/e has talked to the ex-wife of JP.

:moo:

 

[maskedwoman]

and you believe it is logical that neither TBI nor the Apple Store can unlock this phone? For all this time?

Boy that Jeff Pearcy must be some kind of genius or hacker whiz to figure out how to lock his phone in such a manner that even experts cannot get it unlocked.

Actually, he does not need to be. This recently came up in another middle Tennessee murder case (link below). A DA asked for a court order requiring the defendant to give them his password because iphones can only be opened by the owner or Apple and there is an extended backlog if you need Apple to do it. That makes sense because Apple's website said if you forget your passcode you have to erase your phone using iTunes, find my phone, or the phone's recovery mode and, obviously, they want to preserve what's on the phone. Apparently, even when Apple does it, they can download the data but the phone is still erased. Weird.

I don't think the request has been ruled on yet.

http://www.murfreesboropost.com/assistant-da-seeks-iphone-password-of-walmart-double-murder-suspect-cms-39624

 

[Emi]

Is this trial televised anywhere