Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 #28

[duster1979]

Doing the math based on one site, one offender would've been 14/15 and the victims were 0-13 and the other offender would've been 19/20 and the victim was 0-13. I'm estimating age due to the conviction possibly being months after the actual incident. They are currently 30 and 35 respectively.

The date listed is the date the perp is placed on the registry, not the date of the offense. Two columns over it shows the age at the time of the offense.

 

[DocBrew]

I’m not sure that they would refute it here, simply because they have neither confirmed or denied many important aspects of this case. They said as much as one of their early press conferences. You’re absolutely right though, her making it home would change everything.

What I mean by refute in this instance is to say publicly that they know no such thing and that these two's recollections are mistaken. I would imagine such details would matter when it came to prosecuting a case. If a random street abductor did it while she was jogging, then we now have two defense witnesses who were told by LE that she made it home.

JMO.

 

[otto]

Doing online homework does not constitute having communication "with anyone". "Anyone" is persons. LE would have said "anyone or anything" if they were referring to her entire digital footprint. Plus, we also know that many texting and social media apps now auto-delete messages, so them not finding any communications does not prove that there were none.

JMO.

If Mollie touched her online course at any time after she went jogging, her laptop would have communicated with the university's LMS. Doing online course work does constitute communication in the same way that sending a text or an email constitutes communication.

According to police, there is no credible communication with Mollie since the time that she went jogging. That means, there is no credible evidence that she accessed her online course after she went jogging.

 

[Al Hoffman]

That’s true. I just wish we had some facts to work with.

It appears, at this point, that LE is telling us that MT went missing between 7:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m the evening of 18 July, I think we can take that as a fact at this time. But, yeah you're right, past that it's a best case scenario, or your best SWAG - Flip a coin or take a guess, six of one or a half-dozen of the other, take a chance, make a choice?

I think I'll have another drink of beer and ruminate on this for a while.

MOO

 

[FindHG]

Where are her earbuds?

Missing would be the most plausible answer based on media reports and what's on the official site, if I'm not mistaken?

Earbuds are bluetooth connections, I think?

 

[crumbcleaner]

Delete

 

[MassGuy]

Where are her earbuds?

Missing, As far as we know. Just one more element that lends credence to the idea that she never made it back from her jog.

 

[crumbcleaner]

The date listed is the date the perp is placed on the registry, not the date of the offense. Two columns over it shows the age at the time of the offense.

I must be on a different site, mine shows conviction date and DOB so the math is simple. Mine also shows age of victim at the time.

 

[Dushi]

Missing would be the most plausible answer based on media reports and what's on the official site, if I'm not mistaken?

I feel if she had been at home working on homework when taken, her earbuds likely would be there JMO

 

[zummo2000]

I have trouble with the 'came home and worked on paper' scenario. Kids today are great at multi-tasking, she would have been texting, emailing, doing some kind of social media interaction sitting at the computer (aside from the snapchat on the phone).

 

[otto]

Just one minor point. If she was writing a paper there would likely be a record of that within the document itself. Microsoft Word for instance, automatically saves your document every 10 minutes (by default).

Sure. Should we believe that Mollie was at home at 10PM banging out a paper and police still claim that the last credible sighting and communication was when she was jogging?

 

[DocBrew]

If Mollie touched her online course at any time after she went jogging, her laptop would have communicated with the university's LMS. Doing online course work does constitute communication in the same way that sending a text or an email constitutes communication.

According to police, there is no credible communication with Mollie since the time that she went jogging. That means, there is no credible evidence that she accessed her online course after she went jogging.

No, the police said there is no credible communications "with anyone". While I agree that logging into her homework constitutes communications of the digital variety, this is not included in some broad-sweeping police statement. In my view, you appear to be making an assumption on what LE means rather than reading what they are actually saying.

JMO.

 

[MassGuy]

Sure. Should we believe that Mollie was at home at 10PM banging out a paper and police still claim that the last credible sighting and communication was when she was jogging?

I don’t believe she made it home. I was just saying that had she in fact made it home, the computer document could be evidence that lends itself to that conclusion.

 

[duster1979]

I must be on a different site, mine shows conviction date and DOB so the math is simple.

I'm not aware of anyone who has been convicted of a crime on the same day it was committed.

I use the official registry site for the state of Iowa. I have a teenage daughter so I'm very familiar with it.

 

[otto]

No, the police said there is no credible communications "with anyone". While I agree that logging into her homework constitutes communications of the digital variety, this is not included in some broad-sweeping police statement. In my view, you appear to be making an assumption on what LE means rather than reading what they are actually saying.

JMO.

Not at all.

This is what police have said:

"There have been no credible sightings of, or communications with, Mollie since that time."
https://findingmollie.iowa.gov/

There is nothing about "with anyone", they strictly refer to "communications", which we know includes digital communication.

 

[FindHG]

I feel if she had been at home working on homework when taken, her earbuds likely would be there JMO

Doing homework listening to music?

Listening to music jogging and taken then?

Listening to music end of run around or in house,
whomever pressed enter on her open PC to file answer anyone could've filled in, to throw off timeline,
or more likely the PC saves automatically after some set time not to lose work?

Does what's on the official site leave all these possibilities and more open or not?

 

[curiousjo]

If Mollie touched her online course at any time after she went jogging, her laptop would have communicated with the university's LMS. Doing online course work does constitute communication in the same way that sending a text or an email constitutes communication.

According to police, there is no credible communication with Mollie since the time that she went jogging. That means, there is no credible evidence that she accessed her online course after she went jogging.

Interesting as it was posted on here that DJs neighbor said the LE told him that she passed by his home that night and was up late doing homework....

So is it true .... FBI was searching the block of homes past the car wash yesterday? ....she has an old BF there?

 

[crumbcleaner]

I'm not aware of anyone who has been convicted of a crime on the same day it was committed.

I use the official registry site for the state of Iowa. I have a teenage daughter so I'm very familiar with it.

I never stated that, I actually estimated the age by taking away a year assuming that the conviction took place months if not a year later.
I'm looking on iowasexoffender.com

 

[Warwick7]

With an on line course, time stamps are recorded. With Snapchat pictures are recorded.

However, is there proof I've missed that any activity was MT?
Who hasn't watched a who-done-it and watch a perp take pictures, send texts, make a phone call, or even get on a computer and pretend to be the victim.

 

[Jeng1810]

bumped for reference

Also if she did return home and do homework they likely would have tightened that timeline knowing where she was later in the evening!

 

[MassGuy]

Doing homework listening to music?

Listening to music jogging and taken then?

Listening to music end of run around or in house,
whomever pressed enter on her open PC to file answer anyone could've filled in, to throw off timeline?

They’re going to be looking at more than just her computer to reach this determination. Plenty of people have attempted to throw off an investigation before, by creating a false digital history (text messages, phone location, social media posts). Usually these people are extremely close to the victim.

 

[Q.E.D.]

I'm not aware of anyone who has been convicted of a crime on the same day it was committed.

I use the official registry site for the state of Iowa. I have a teenage daughter so I'm very familiar with it.

In any case, regardless of the age, if they are listed as Tier 3 then they are considered to pose an ongoing high level of risk to the community and to the public at large. You are supposed to be especially vigilant if this level of offender is in your community.