Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 #12

[Hatfield]

JMO
I want to toss out a new theory that has been forming based on past couple days and the news conferences.

My older theory was:
Early on I was stuck on her leaving on her own because of the pressures of the upcoming wedding and what I perceived as her fear that the BF was going to propose to her and she may have felt pressure to get married and just had to get away. I wont post again the Dads comments and the joke the brother of the BF made regarding her marrying the BF but most know what I mean and have seen that in the news. IMO the pressure or fear she had about possible marriage to the BF was very real.

My new theory:
My theory changed because I cant see her putting everyone through this so long without calling her parents. So what if all that fear and pressure was still true and she confided in someone close to her about her concerns about the wedding trip. Now lets say this friend took it to heart and he felt compelled to "save her" from her situation.

Maybe her and her friend had even jokingly started plans for her to run away for a couple days but this friend gets so emotionally invested in being her hero that he doesnt take it as a joke and he puts his plan into action to "save her". He may have taken her and is not letting her leave. She may have not realized how this close friend was getting obsessed with her. He may be holding her and not letting her go or contact anyone.

And at the abduction time he took her she would have not known his intentions and would have let him in the front door. Either a ride to work or the night before to study with her. At that point he was still just a concerned friend to her. He could have blindsided her with his alterior motives.

Could something like that have happened here?

I actually hope so because it could mean she is still alive.

 

[kkdj]

I think the pressers are very carefully scripted and performed for a very specific individual. Who that is, I have no idea. I do think it's someone local, and known to Mollie, at least in passing.

Her family looked very, very distressed in this one, and along with the brothers being absent makes me think there has been some very disheartening developments. I did not see a lot of hope in them today.

They sure did seem distraught. I wonder if the brothers just couldn't hold it together and so were asked not to attend. The family might know something that is just eating them alive that we are not privy too as of yet. This is just such an awful and heartbreaking situation.

 

[ACG2x]

I don't believe for one moment she just took off. I can't see using that amount of resources for someone who did a runner, especially the intense federal presence. And she doesn't seem at all flaky or impulsive.

I think this case has drawn so much media coverage because things like this just aren't supposed to happen in small town idyllic places like Brooklyn, Iowa. And Mollie could be everyone's BFF, sister, niece, daughter, babysitter, classmate, co-worker. And she's gone. Just. Gone.

This case has everything that sparks a MSM frenzy - all-American young, pretty, smiling white girl vanishes without a trace in a quaint picture perfect little farm town. Think about some of the characteristics of other cases that have sparked so much interest and many have lots of things in common. Laci Peterson, Elizabeth Smart, Natalee Holloway, Chandra Levy and the list goes on. MT's case has the added intrigue that LE hasn't released anything so everyone is left to speculate and speculate they do.

I am not getting on a soapbox about what's right or wrong about that, just stating historical facts. If MT had been a 50+ divorcee from the Chicago ghetto, there is no way there would be this much press. Right or wrong, that's how it is.

 

[Millhouse]

MT's cousin told Nancy Grace that MT was very excited about the DR trip and wouldn't stop talking about it and was really looking forward to the trip as well. Didn't hear they were going to be the only attendees but destination weddings typically have smaller guest lists due to the cost of traveling unless you're wealthy/famous/etc.

I think OP said attendants, not attendees. Meaning, the only bridesmaids/groomsmen. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Marie224]

I said in a previous MT thread that I assume and hope LE has looked at the attendance on 07/19 of people she worked with - specifically males. The narrative that she knew the person, they wanted more, she didn't and something happened could fit. It's also possible that rather than try to go to her mom's house in the rain for the car, she was offered a ride from someone who knew she'd be at the house alone.

This would explain the dogs being in the basement because she was getting ready for work, explains the red shirt being gone since she was wearing it for work and why her cell was with her. Only thing it doesn't cover is why her contacts/glasses were left as I don't believe she went to work without them. Some family member mentioned she was "blind as a bat" or something like that without either. It's possible that whoever it was tried to make some kind of advance before they left for work.

This case just doesn't feel like your typical random abductor story of kidnap/rape/murder/dump body. The way it's unfolded there almost has to be more to it. Still firmly in the camp of whoever took her is someone she knew - maybe not acquainted with or close to - but knew who they were.

Again... I have worn contacts for over 20 years and I am blind as a bat. Yes, I sleep with them and I cannot leave the house without my "eyes". Again, I stash disposable contacts all over the place (Purse, bathroom, car, my office desk, make-up case etc.) + I have a few pairs of glasses. The fact her contacts/glasses were found at the house, doesn't mean they were her only pair. I wear "dailies" and I have over 100 pairs of contacts. If she wore contacts, they sell them by the pack of 6 +, not just 1 pair. Hope this helps everyone who doesn't wear corrective lenses.

 

[Deleted member 202271]

I have a thought on why the change in demeanor today, and it's not a good one. They seem to have been saying that they are sure MT is alive and they have no evidence that she isn't (paraphrased, of course), and after saying that at the PC and all of the interviews with family and DJ, I'm wondering if the shirt was thrown out there as the evidence they need to know she isn't still alive. Of course, it could be to make them think she isn't alive while she actually is, but I really don't believe that's the case unless there's no DNA on it from her. I don't feel like the PCs have been for the benefit of the public or the press, I think they've been a way to talk to the person who has/had her. MOO

Yes to all that. I'm also of a mind that the PCs are being used as a tool to communicate to someone or make someone think "Well, I'm in the clear now, so can take a rest."
And because you are a creative spelling expert, perhaps you have an opinion about my reference to media wanting to avoid a leibel case by naming a POI.

 

[PommyMommy]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/radio....ommunity-speak-about-the-on-going-search/amp/

Laura Calderwood spoke about the morning she learned of her daughter's disappearance.

Robbin Cornett & Mike Allgood - two local Brooklyn, Iowa citizens. Robbin shares her experience being interviewed by the FBI, in her kitchen.

Kaitlin Gibson works at The Classic Deli in downtown Brooklyn. Her sister graduated with Mollie.

Julie Weiss Julie Weiss is an employee at Brooklyn Guernsey Malcom school district whose son graduated with Mollie and knows both Mollie and her boyfriend's families. Julie helped with the initial canvassing and searching.

Linda Massengale Linda Massengale is the store manager at Casey's General Store and talked about sharing video with authorities and what she remembers from those nights and the rescue efforts. Dalton also worked for Linda.

 

[ACG2x]

Again... I have worn contacts for over 20 years and I am blind as a bat. Yes, I sleep with them and I cannot leave the house without my "eyes". Again, I stash disposable contacts all over the place (Purse, bathroom, car, my office desk, make-up case etc.) + I have a few pairs of glasses. The fact her contacts/glasses were found at the house, doesn't mean they were her only pair. I wear "dailies" and I have over 100 pairs of contacts. If she wore contacts, they sell them by the pack of 6 +, not just 1 pair. Hope this helps everyone who doesn't wear corrective lenses.

That would fit the narrative more that she was abducted sometime after getting ready for work on 07/19. The house was just too perfect and "as it should be" with dogs fed and watered, items she'd normally take to work with her taken and no signs of a struggle in the home. The contacts were the only piece for me and what you said makes sense.

 

[ACG2x]

I’d like to examine some evidence. Got some?

Don’t feed the trolls. Normally I’d scroll and roll but I’m dying to know what EVIDENCE we are supposed to be examining right now LOL

All that evidence that Winker and team released at the press conference toda...oh wait

 

[Bravo]

Yes plenty of other sites who allow annihilation of Victims, loved ones and general random people. This site just doesn't happen to be one of them.

 

[Jealoushe]

Posters please remember not to share Social media links unless it is the victim or confirmed POI....also asking about rumours.... unless it is in MSM or LE verifies we can not discuss here and I really do not want this thread closed.

 

[Mom24]

so my post got deleted or held by a mod or what?

If you pm the admin on page 1 she'll explain why. In this case I believe it was because you posited a theory based on a person that isn't a person of interest named by the police. The admins here are really careful about making sure that things posted don't harm innocent people, and because online things last forever it could be detrimental to name people who aren't connected to a case or sleuth them. Years later someone could google their name, it leads here and they think the person had something to do with an abduction. Everyone has skeletons or things they're not proud of, I picked my nose in second grade and wiped it on my wall, but I wouldn't want that attached to my name for everyone to read forever.
Also, it's not a discussion of evidence if the person isn't connected to the case, it's merely mudslinging a potentially and more often than not, innocent bystander. So we do examine and discuss evidence, we pick it to death, but we discuss real evidence which includes true persons of interest.

 

[Vedder]

Everyone has skeletons or things they're not proud of, I picked my nose in second grade and wiped it on my wall, but I wouldn't want that attached to my name for everyone to read forever.

You just killed me. LOL

 

[Bits777]

If you pm the admin on page 1 she'll explain why. In this case I believe it was because you posited a theory based on a person that isn't a person of interest named by the police. The admins here are really careful about making sure that things posted don't harm innocent people, and because online things last forever it could be detrimental to name people who aren't connected to a case or sleuth them. Years later someone could google their name, it leads here and they think the person had something to do with an abduction. Everyone has skeletons or things they're not proud of, I picked my nose in second grade and wiped it on my wall, but I wouldn't want that attached to my name for everyone to read forever.
Also, it's not a discussion of evidence if the person isn't connected to the case, it's merely mudslinging a potentially and more often than not, innocent bystander. So we do examine and discuss evidence, we pick it to death, but we discuss real evidence which includes true persons of interest.

In this PC the sheriff says if anyone anywhere outside of Iowa believes they see Mollie they are to call their local le - was this mentioned in first PC? I only remember them asking who was in Brooklyn Iowa on 7/18

 

[DeadCat]

Hey magz. I didn't read much into that since it was 10 p.m. ish. He worked construction, likely exhausted and reportedly not much into social media. IIRC he fell asleep after opening SC.

Around 2:24
DJ: ...didn’t pay attention to the caption because it didn’t mean a whole lot. We were just talking back-and-forth on Snapchat.

 

[Mom24]

[/QUOTE] (respectfully snipped)
I actually hope so because it could mean she is still alive.[/QUOTE]
For what it's worth, I do believe she's alive. There's no other reason to keep information so closely guarded unless they are hoping to protect her. I've seen this happen in other cases over the years here and today's presser gives me hope that she's alive.

 

[LarryLujack]

If you pm the admin on page 1 she'll explain why. In this case I believe it was because you posited a theory based on a person that isn't a person of interest named by the police. The admins here are really careful about making sure that things posted don't harm innocent people, and because online things last forever it could be detrimental to name people who aren't connected to a case or sleuth them. Years later someone could google their name, it leads here and they think the person had something to do with an abduction. Everyone has skeletons or things they're not proud of, I picked my nose in second grade and wiped it on my wall, but I wouldn't want that attached to my name for everyone to read forever.
Also, it's not a discussion of evidence if the person isn't connected to the case, it's merely mudslinging a potentially and more often than not, innocent bystander. So we do examine and discuss evidence, we pick it to death, but we discuss real evidence which includes true persons of interest.

But no one has been named a person of interest. So discussing anyone by name, regardless if they are family or not, is mudslinging. Wouldnt you agree?

 

[Bravo]

LOL Mom24 you picked your nose!!!! I never did as my Brother told me my head would cave in. Sorry for the O/T but a much needed laugh. Carry on...….

 

[Gussified]

Been lurking here and following this case for a while. I noticed some confusion about Snapchat and just wanted to clarify some things about it, as I use Snapchat frequently.

As I am sure most of you have heard, Snapchat is a messaging application on smartphones that involves sending picture or video messages that automatically delete after a short period of time (usually seconds). So say, for example, I am at the beach. I would take a picture of the beach, add a caption (i.e. "gotta love the dog days of summer") and click on the friends that I want to send it to, and boom, it's sent. And they can open it whenever and they will see my picture message for a few seconds usually. My point is that Snapchat, from my experience at least, is a very casual form of communication, and most of the time a response is not usually needed or expected. It's more of a "hey friends, look what I am doing right now" type thing.

Now, you can also post these messages to "stories", which are essentially pictures or videos that everyone on your friends list is able to see for a 24 hour period. There is indeed location services on the application as well, called "Snap Map" where you can see the exact locations of your Snapchat friends, if they have the service enabled. This is depicted on a global map much like Google Maps (but not as detailed), with a "Bitmoji", a digital avatar usually customized by the user. I would say of my 100+ friends on Snapchat, about 30-40% have this enabled, including myself. Snap Map can definitely be dangerous, but it has to be voluntarily activated by the user; I do not believe it is on by default. I would say people use this feature mostly to show that they are traveling or doing something interesting.

I haven't read anywhere that Mollie had been using Snap Map, but if a potential perp was friends with her on Snapchat, he/she could theoretically stalk them if she had the service activated. I would hope that LE has investigated ALL of her friends on Snapchat. Usually, to be someone's Snapchat friend means you know them personally to some degree, but recently I have noticed the application has rolled out a new "Quick Add" feature which allows you to add mutual friends or other people whose phone number is not in your contacts (Snapchat accounts are usually linked to a person's phone number). Speaking from experience, I have multiple Snapchat friends who I am not very close with at all, but we added each other through the Quick Add feature. This is Snapchat's way of broadening its social media image. Now, one important note: When someone adds you on Snapchat, you have to add them back for them to communicate with you directly and, usually, to see their stories or their location on the map, if enabled. So, you would most likely know, in some capacity, everyone on your Snapchat list, unless you are careless.

Finally, to add a note about the Snapchat message DJ received from her. Usually, Snapchat will say when a message is "received" too. So, for example, I have a message that I "received" 6 hours ago. It doesn't give the exact time, but a rough approximation of when it was sent to me. After 24 hours though, it would just say "received 2 d ago" for 2 days, for example. My point is: the rough time when Mollie sent her last Snapchat message to her boyfriend should be known, and perhaps 10 PM is indeed when it was actually sent as well.

Thank you so much for the primer on Snapchat. I really think snapchat is instrumental in this case.

 

[Bravo]

But no one has been named a person of interest. So discussing anyone by name, regardless if they are family or not, is mudslinging. Wouldnt you agree?

Depends on what is said and how it's worded