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

[rebel123]

Was thinking last night that in order to “grab” a running (moving) target, the abductor would have had to run up to her, wouldn’t he? Pretty bizarre to think this happened...unless she was in a truly isolated spot.

It could be more then one person.

 

[FindHG]

The first objective after abducting Mollie is get out of town. I think that was from Brooklyn to 385 ave heading East. Maybe they stopped at the top right dot where he figure out what kind of devices she had. Maybe that's a location where Mollie's heart rate spiked. He drove South to the lower left right dot. That is where he stopped the digital signature - same area as the farm searches.

The question is, where did he go next?
East or West?

My guess would be East, following all your great posts.

 

[JudgeJudi]

RSBM

Known evidence that she made it back to the house:
- Two second hand accounts of what people say LE told them

Known evidence that she was abducted on a jog/walk:
- LE says that she was last seen jogging and had no further communication after that
- Earbuds, Fitbit, phone and running clothes are only items missing from the house which are all what she typically brought with her when jogging. Items that she may take if she left to go somewhere else after returning (ID/wallet) were still there.

It is NOT known evidence that she made it back to the house. Second hand accounts are classified as hearsay and as such will usually be inadmissible in a court of law. It’s irrelevant that LE told a witness that or not.

If a witness saw her return to the house, that would be considered direct evidence. Neither judge nor jury would have to make assumptions or draw inferences.

It is NOT known evidence that she was abducted on a jog/walk. No-one saw her being abducted, no-one heard her scream and no-one saw her being dragged unwillingly into a vehicle. There is no proof whatsoever that this happened. Assumptions aren’t evidence.

Edited to emphasize NOT for the sake of clarity.

 

[duster1979]

I am very heavy in the camp someone had aces to her PC. I know for a fact Team VIewer can be used on a pc without the other party knowing. They just needed access to her PC. Please if you doubt me... research it! My husband used it for work all the time.

We are likely talking about a first time killer here, one who isn’t going to have the foresight or ability afterwards (mentally)to worry about Mollie’s computer. This is movie type stuff, not real life.

Yeah, we're not talking about international espionage here. I don't see accessing her computer to be a priority for someone planning this sort of crime.

 

[JnRyan]

We are likely talking about a first time killer here, one who isn’t going to have the foresight or ability afterwards (mentally)to worry about Mollie’s computer. This is movie type stuff, not real life.

I tend to agree. The Tara Grinstead case in GA is an example. I would not necessarily call her killer organized. He supposedly broke into her house using a credit card on the lock. To the best of our knowledge he didn't bring a "kit" (handcuffs, zip ties, duct tape, etc.). He simply strangled her, left very sign of a struggle and removed her body. From all we know so far he had not killed anyone before or since. LE stated "he was never on our radar" and it took over 10 years to solve and that was after someone close to him called LE.

 

[Stippling]

We are likely talking about a first time killer here, one who isn’t going to have the foresight or ability afterwards (mentally)to worry about Mollie’s computer. This is movie type stuff, not real life.

A "first time" killer who has been able to suppress his urges for 10-20 years, suddenly caves on a Wednesday night and decides to abduct a random jogger capable of resisting without any sign of a struggle or even attracting attention to himself? If this were his first, I'd hate to see his encore.

 

[TL4S]

MOO If I go off the theory that this was a regional local who was a stranger to MT (or at least not a close acquaintance), and the first two red dots are related to his whereabouts vs. hers, then I begin the trail at the red dot near bf's house, where I believe she was taken. I've mapped the route from there, as has been discussed a few times before, with the ending being at the pig farm, not the last red dot. (See map: red is route with MT, yellow is perp's route home, black Xs are red dots from LE map)

Now, here's a couple ideas (IMO):

1) The route is rural and specific, and while I don't necessarily think it was planned, I do think the drive is familiar to the perp. Maybe he is also a creature of habit and is more comfortable in locations he already knows. (As I noted yesterday, the northern red dot on V21 used to have a stand of trees and a silo on the northwest corner, which has been converted to cropland at some point (can be seen from various views on bing maps - don't know if this is important).

2) If this was an opportunistic event, then the perp already had a reason to be on that route within Brooklyn between the truck stop and car wash. Basing off the time of day, I'd guess it's his route home from work, which means he lives to the north. V18 to Hwy 6 seems like an obvious possibility. From there he could head any direction to any neighboring town or rural property.

3) If he does live to the north, then I think heading south for the crime suggests he does not want to do it near home. If he left MT near the pig farm (maybe around 9:45pm) (with crimes happening along the V21 route - abandoned buildings at southern red dot), I don't think he'd back track, I think he'd get out the quickest way, which would be to jump onto hwy 21. If he's going to head home, then going north on hwy 21 would take him right back to hwy 6 (without having to go back through Brooklyn).

4) Moo I think he was scared/freaked out, not bold. He wanted to go home unseen, but fast, thus taking the hwy.

5) I don't think he bothered one bit worrying about fitbits and cell phones. I think they are still on her. I think if the cell phone suddenly died it was because it got wet.

6) One consideration: Perhaps LE has stated that the community is not in danger because they already have the perp in custody- on another, unrelated charge. Something to get him in on. Maybe this happened sometime between PCs. Now they are trying to gather as much evidence, witnesses, etc. to build a case against him so that the formal charge sticks. Maybe this is wishful thinking.

 

[JnRyan]

I don't why I was so impatient for the thread to open this morning. I have seen almost nothing in the last 24 hours that is new and I don't really see where I can even come up with a possible scenario. It seems like any time - during her run, after her run, in the morning - has an equal possibility.

 

[bestill]

It's beyond time for something to break for Mollie and her to be found!

 

[kkdj]

A "first time" killer who has been able to suppress his urges for 10-20 years, suddenly caves on a Wednesday night and decides to abduct a random jogger capable of resisting without any sign of a struggle or even attracting attention to himself? If this were his first, I'd hate to see his encore.

I'm not seeing a first timer here either. Nor a peer as 1. they would be too easy to crack, tell someone, leave hints, etc. 2. If it is someone older than their peers then this type of behavior would have already displayed itself elsewhere, such as sexual assault, domestic violence, etc.

 

[rebel123]

There are lots of assumptions being made; we don't know that any harm has come to Mollie.

 

[duster1979]

RSBM


It is not known evidence that she made it back to the house. Second hand accounts are classified as hearsay and as such will usually be inadmissible in a court of law. It’s irrelevant that LE told a witness that or not.

If a witness saw her return to the house, that would be considered direct evidence. Neither judge nor jury would have to make assumptions or draw inferences.

It is not known evidence that she was abducted on a jog/walk. No-one saw her being abducted, no-one heard her scream and no-one saw her being dragged unwillingly into a vehicle. There is no proof whatsoever that this happened. Assumptions aren’t evidence.

I think you're overlooking the word "evidence" in the previous post and focusing on the word "known". No, it is not "known" that she was taken while on the jog, but the fact that she was last seen jogging and that the only items missing were things she would have taken with her jogging are most certainly evidence of that scenario.

 

[JudgeJudi]

RSBM

Another view of the TA Truck Stop in Brooklyn, IA.

RSBM

Watching the video I found it interesting how a trucker checks the tires mounted on their vehicle. I wonder if most/all truckers check their tires in that manner? I've never seen that before.

I thought it was interesting seeing the guy hitting the tyres with that stick. Hmmm. A driver in a car could make use of one of those too. Hop out and give someone a quick whack on the head.

 

[JudgeJudi]

@otto I am trying to understand what you meant in the post you made on the issue of no communication "Since police have said that there is no communication from Mollie after she went jogging, we know that she did not return home and use her computer to access her online course". Don't you think its possible that LE was referring to 'communication' to mean verbal or text or email rather than online coursework? Why would you think that 'communication' was meant to include coursework online?

In a prior thread we went back and forth quite a bit discussing the ins-outs of the various online platforms and it seemed like with the platform MT had at Iowa that she could have logged in earlier and the system might not have logged her out. I understand that you are making a very definitive statement/drawing a conclusion about MT not arriving home again based on LE making only a general statement about 'no communication'. We had statement from the family in the early days of this saga that they had looked at history logs and it seemed like she had been working after the jog. I don't think we really know what LE meant when it said 'no communication' so I'm trying to understand how you thought about this entire statement from LE and why you felt the online coursework would fall under the LE use of the word 'communication'? Fine point, maybe or maybe not?!!

My point is that in order to make the statement you are making that a number of assumptions had to be made about what LE meant when it said 'no communication' and I'm not sure LE has confirmed any of those assumptions to the public yet. I think this is one of the reasons why we are still dancing around how what happened did in fact happen. In contrast to your more broad interpretation of the use of the word 'communication', I used a narrower interpretation of 'communiation' to then assume she might have been doing schoolwork after the jog.

I understand where Otto is coming from and technically speaking he’s correct, but personally speaking I don’t believe LE would be using nuanced words when they’re making an appeal to the general public. The very fact that there’s been some back and forth here illustrates to me at least that the general population would take its more literal meaning.

 

[rashomon]

Has it been made public at what time of day on Thursday July 19 Mollie's family went over to the house to check on her?

For in case Mollie never made it home after her jog, that would have been a very long time for the dogs in the basement to be left unattended. Has it been made public in what condition the dogs were found?

 

[Onescout]

This is an excellent article about LE strategy...by a veteran LE officer. I apologize if this has been posted before. Its worth a read, especially if you’re frustrated over the lack of info at pressers.

Why All the Secrecy by Law Enforcement Regarding the Disappearance of Mollie Tibbetts? - Lee Lofland

 

[PommyMommy]

Updated 8/17/2018

WHAT WE KNOW​

1. Mollie’s jogging clothing is missing – pink sports bra, black shorts & running shoes
2. Mollie’s devices are missing – cell phone, armband, FitBit and white earbuds
3. She has about 3 different routes and likes to mix them up
4. The dogs were in the basement
5. DJ said the door was probably unlocked
6. She typically picks up the car at her mom's house before dark
7. She went for a run about 7:30
8. She usually runs for 45 minutes
9. LE reconstructed her run, relying on Fitbit data, cell phone pings and eyewitnesses
10. A digital signal led police to the Guernsey farm area
11. Video footage was collected from various businesses, including Casey’s & D&M
12. Mollie's mom was asked by FBI if Mollie was "in a home" at 9:45
13. She may have done homework (time unknown & unconfirmed)
14. Snapchat appeared to be indoors & taken that day, viewed at 10PM
15. Mollie was a creature of habit
16. DJ sent her a text in the morning and she did not respond
17. JT sent her at text approx. 7:30 am asking if she needed the car – no response
18. There were no vehicles in the driveway (as there usually would be)
19. Her driver's license, passport and debit card were at the house
20. Usual evening routine: run, shower/eat or eat/shower, homework, bed
21. No signs of a struggle or forced entry

Reported Sightings

• NH, 7:30 pm - W Pershing Dr
• RT, time unknown - W. Des Moines – walking east, would have to go N or S
• DR, 8 pm - East 2nd Street - jogging west toward Casey’s

DC, time unknown, West St - told by LE (not an actual sighting) that MT jogged past his house and made it home

FBI poster indicates that Mollie was last seen running on Pershing Drive.
https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/kidnap/mollie-cecelia-tibbetts/@@download.pdf

 

[BIC]

While reading all the posts about how she could have been abducted, and if only 1 person could do it alone or not, it occurred to me, unless I missed it, no one thought of the automobile being used as a weapon, or means of subduing her. If the location of abduction was in an area that was more secluded, he could have driven up behind her, and hit her hard enough to knock her down. This would then give him reason to make contact with her, either to forcibly get her in the vehicle, or make her think he was taking her home, or to the hospital. If someone else would have happened upon the scene, he would have had an out, he was “helping” her, not abducting her. IMO

 

[Santa Baby]

Since snapchat is not automatically deleted like people think (What Really Happens to Your Deleted Snapchat Photos), wonder if FBI have tried to trace it. Also, the digital footprint that's left on her account would show if and when she sent snapchats.

 

[JudgeJudi]

I think you're overlooking the word "evidence" in the previous post and focusing on the word "known". No, it is not "known" that she was taken while on the jog, but the fact that she was last seen jogging and that the only items missing were things she would have taken with her jogging are most certainly evidence of that scenario.

No, I haven't overlooked it at all. Duster said it was known
evidence on both occasions. I highlighted in my reply that it was not known evidence.

I've gone back and put NOT in caps in my post so there's no misunderstanding.