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

[kkdj]

Big Beautiful Man, I think.

 

[feralwriter]

I agree with this statement. IMO, it is a stranger abduction. Here we are four weeks missing and the amount of manpower, LE & FBI, is still aggressively working this case. IMO, if LE had a local suspect and were simply just collecting evidence for prosecution, this heavy presence of LE wouldn't still be in Brooklyn. IMO LE or FBI knew early on that there was a serious event happening with Mollie. I just have to wonder what that is, I think they found something that connects this case to others.

It is easy to see some similarities to the Evansville girls case. Now, I am at a point where I would like to look at where the Evansville girls and/or Delphi girls are different. I would like to find discrepancies to disprove the connection between the girls and MT. This is just an exercise in trying to look at the case from a different angle.
Evansville girls missing July 13, 2012
Delphi girls missing Feb 13, 2017
MT missing July 18, 2018
I am not even sure where to start. I did follow along in Lizzie and Lyric's case closely but my memory isn't all that sharp!



I think these are good questions. IMO the predator did not need to have seen or known Mollie at all, perhaps he was or had been hunting for days. Lizzie and Lyric were reported missing July 13, 2012. Is July a coincidence?

Lyric Cook and Elizabeth Collins
Feral writer, Were you here for Lizzie and Lyrics case? You might appreciate going through some of those threads, a lot of experienced and bright minds were wracking their brains on the Evansville girls missing case. I think there are similarities, right down to a point where there was a pig farmer being looked at. I don't want to distract from Mollie or go off down a rabbit hole though!
Mollie come home!
Just morning thoughts. JMO

No, I'm brand new (tho did join back in 2001 or so. lost login). I know squat about the other murders. You're right, let's start looking for similarities.

 

[Kapua]

I think it takes 30 days to get cell phone data that is subpoenaed. But you can only get the data for the person you are requesting (Mollie in this case). Even if there is another identically timed ping FROM A DIFFERENT CELL PHONE at the same time, LE cannot get this data without knowing the cell phone number ahead of time and asking for another subpoena.

LE probably has her cell phone data and timeline....but that is all they can legally get right now until they have an actual POI

They can dump the towers and get all of the numbers.
Police Use "Tower Dumps" To Collect Cell Phone Data Without A Warrant

 

[DizzyB]

Everyone overcomplicates things Why? No one needs to try to "throw off LE". LE doesn't know who did this. Most likely the perp has done this before and refined their skills. It was a 30 second grab.

Kids snapchat EVERYTHING. Everybody in their group-and friends of friends-might know that Mollie was alone. She could have snapped herself putting the dogs in the basement. Mollie might have snapped herself in her running attire on her way out the door. And someone with evil intentions who knew her movements could have decided that this was the time to "coincidentally" drive on by and say hello, perhaps offer Mollie a ride to her Mom's. Perhaps someone not in her immediate circle, but just on the periphery.
SM gives one the ability to know a lot of stuff about complete strangers. I'm sure the FBI is well aware of that fact and acted accordingly in their investigation.

 

[Vedder]

Big Beautiful Man, I think.

Ha! I needed that laugh.

Moooo

 

[who knew?]

I have never shaken the idea that there's a connection between Delphi and Evansdale, but I do know that police have said they do not have a connection. As soon as I read about Mollie, right away I thought there was a connection with Evansdale.

I think one of the reasons that police need as many resources as possible with Mollie is that they are concerned that there is a serial killer in the area and that if they do not stop him now, more girls and young women will vanish.

My guess is that he was getting started with the Evansdale cousins, and I think he was in his 20s at that time. I think he had a familiarity with Meyers Lake because he heard stories from parents and other older extended family about what a great party spot it used to be. I think he knew about Seven Bridges Park because he spent time there for the recreation activities that were there before it shut down. Alternatively, it's a hunting area and it's a family bonding experience to go hunting in places like Seven Bridges Park. I think he is familiar with all the backroads and hunting areas in and around Evansdale and Brooklyn.

Similarity between Evansdale and Delphi is the fact that in both cases at least one girl may have been lured and she brought a friend along, perhaps thinking there was safety in numbers. Both sets of girls - one is slight and one is heavier. Bodies were found near a shallow river in a rural park. None of the girls were straight with their parents about where they were going and what they were doing. Evansdale girls were younger than Delphi girls. Big question is: if they were lured, why didn't police find a digital trace?

You have won me over to your "side". I think you are right - but I don't want you to be. In your scenario, Mollie is dead, which would probably be the case no matter who took her after all the time that has passed. In the beginning, I really thought she was taken by someone who wanted Mollie, and I was certain I knew who had taken her. Maybe that was wishful thinking.
Keep posting Otto - you may be a voice of sanity in this insane world.

 

[zecats]

Maybe he didn’t know Mollie had her phone on her, if she was alive she could have taken her phone out of a pocket to call for help. He could have seen it and then taken it off her and threw it away ? This is complete speculation on my part.

She was reportedly running with phone in arm band and ear buds in. If that’s when she was taken, it’s fairly obvious. Also, I believe almost all have a phone on them somewhere, especially a 20 year old.

 

[Kapua]

She wasn't a fast runner, nor someone large.

My understanding is that Mollie is a cross-country runner, so not necessarily a good sprinter, but more of an endurance runner.

 

[duster1979]

I think we can speculate that may be what occurred, but not necessarily conclude that it is " evidence." LE has never stated "we have evidence she was abducted on her jog." If people claim that, others may assume it is true.

We can speculate that she was taken while running because there's evidence that she went on a run and never returned. I don't know how to make it any more clear than that.

If we're just going to regurgitate what LE says, then there's no point in speculating at all and, frankly, no reason for this site to exist.

 

[OldCop]

LOL....I got reprimanded and deleted by Harmony for expressing my disappointment with the FBI and local LE because I was told the site has a working relationship with LE and does not want to offend LE. I'm new to this site, and have been following this MT case; but it seems this site is getting stagnant because it shuts down any thinking or questioning outside a very narrow box.

I’d like to respectfully disagree with you. I believe the posts have slowed down some because there has not been any new evidence given to the public lately. However, slower is not stagnant.
Secondly, this site does not shut down thinking or questioning outside the box. It encourages it. What it does not allow is bashing of people who may be innocent or those who have been cleared by LE. SM has ruined lives of people by false accusations that take on a life of their own.
Thirdly, a good relationship with LE does not equate with covering up poor investigations. It means that LE appreciates the fact that we try to theorize based on known facts in a methodical way. We do not attempt to undermine their investigations nor do we criticize their work unless and until we know that they have failed to do something that would allow them to solve a case.

 

[Vedder]

We can speculate that she was taken while running because there's evidence that she went on a run and never returned. I don't know how to make it any more clear than that.

If we're just going to regurgitate what LE says, then there's no point in speculating at all and, frankly, no reason for this site to exist.

There isn't evidence. It's assumption. We don't know of any eyewitness who saw her abducted while on her run.

 

[kkdj]

I wonder and maybe even lean towards she almost made it home but never made it inside.

 

[Medical_man]

My understanding is that Mollie is a cross-country runner, so not necessarily a good sprinter, but more of an endurance runner.

In HS. There the usual race is under 3.1miles. She only ran an 8mm, so even her sprint would be 6:45 tops for maybe 200meters.

 

[Onescout]

THe only thing I have a problem with is the eyewitnesses who saw Mollie jogging. Eyewitnesses are commonly unreliable especially when it’s about seeing someone who routinely walks or jogs by their home and nothing eventful happens at that very time.
Days and times get confused. One person saw her, another said he didn't (she passes his house regularly) even though LE says her FitBit gave that info. It’s reminiscent of the witnesses who says she saw Lacie Peterson walking her dog, it was unreliable.

As opposed to eyewitnesses who witnessed something happening, a violent act or argument etc. we tend to record those events in the brain at a different level.
For example:
I would personally be hard pressed to remember if I saw my neighbor drive up the driveway on any given day, was it today or yesterday, hmmmm, but if I saw my neighbor screaming and yelling or doing something out of the ordinary, it would be noted in that part of the brain that deals with fear etc, and I would likely tell my husband soon after the incident...memory is funny like that.

I’m not totally out ruling eyewitnesses , some folks are great witnesses, but most of us are little shaky on the details...date, time, what were they wearing etc...in the mundane.

The most reliable evidence is FitBit data and surveillance video , and data from her computer...and whatever her family and BF have revealed about their last communiques with Mollie. Texts and snapchats are looming large in this instance. It sets up timelines and Mollies presence.
AND if someone was covering their tracks, they would use all this data to their advantage.

And only LE knows what all that is.

ALl of this just bring me back to day one, July 18, over and over again.

 

[CheetosDust]

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?

Agree. Agree. Agree.

 

[cody22]

Did someone call me ????????

 

[feralwriter]

Direct evidence, indirect evidence, Facts and suppositions about those facts. Witnesses and hearsay. We work back from the facts. Maybe if we term them facts.

 

[Bcoin]

Two weeks ago, I thought an arrest could happen at any time. A week ago, I thought they probably had a POI but needed more information. I now believe their trails have gone cold.
A town of that size, with the manpower they have, in the time they’ve had, they could exhaust and rule out nearly every person. I believe that narrows it down to someone in her very inner circle or a stranger. If it’s a stranger, it may go cold soon. If it’s someone very close, it could be years before they slip up, if they ever do. I’ll keep reading, but I believe we are spinning our wheels with the lack of info.

 

[gillglock]

Maybe your sarcasm meter was low on fuel or maybe I didn't get across my sarcasm very well, but you kind of highlighted my point by saying that the secondhand eyewitness accounts were not evidence. I'm aware they aren't - that's part of the point I was trying to make! That is the only time we've seen anything about her making it home. Weigh that against facts that we actually know like 1) LE directly stated per their web site that the last time she was seen is when she was jogging (Fact), and 2) The things missing were only things that she always took with her when jogging, including her jogging clothes, but not her wallet/ID (All Facts). I'll go with the known facts over second hand witness statements! Which again, was my point.

This is why you needed to go back and look at the conversation that was being had at the time. The conversation was a back and forth between many people about whether or not she was taken while jogging or elsewhere. Some started referencing news articles that included speculation about whether or not she made it back home. The point of my post was that we needed to look at what we actually know. There is zero hard evidence to support the idea that she got home. There is evidence (missing jogging clothes, phone, armband) to support the idea that she did not make it home from her jog.

Eyewitness accounts should be no more admissible than a lie detector IMO

 

[MsBetsy]

Maybe your sarcasm meter was low on fuel or maybe I didn't get across my sarcasm very well, but you kind of highlighted my point by saying that the secondhand eyewitness accounts were not evidence. I'm aware they aren't - that's part of the point I was trying to make! That is the only time we've seen anything about her making it home. Weigh that against facts that we actually know like 1) LE directly stated per their web site that the last time she was seen is when she was jogging (Fact), and 2) The things missing were only things that she always took with her when jogging, including her jogging clothes, but not her wallet/ID (All Facts). I'll go with the known facts over second hand witness statements! Which again, was my point.

This is why you needed to go back and look at the conversation that was being had at the time. The conversation was a back and forth between many people about whether or not she was taken while jogging or elsewhere. Some started referencing news articles that included speculation about whether or not she made it back home. The point of my post was that we needed to look at what we actually know. There is zero hard evidence to support the idea that she got home. There is evidence (missing jogging clothes, phone, armband) to support the idea that she did not make it home from her jog.

There is zero hard evidence THAT WE KNOW OF. Just wanted to point that out.