IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #37

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Definitely same line of thinking - that it would be very unusual that this is the first time he has interfered with women. If the suspect lived in a place like, for example, Blairstown, that opens the possibility that there are related crimes in the surrounding areas.
Would not be difficult to locate dairy farms within the region.
 
I am guessing he will continue with the "block out" rage - and try for manslaughter/accident or something along those lines. I think he acted alone and I think his unwanted advances we are now hearing about perhaps led up to the 18th of July and whatever happened after that date. I agree with the other poster I am very glad he led LE to her body. I just cannot imagine the horror these past weeks have been for her family.

I think CR really pinned himself in during his "confession". I just hope they got him on tape. I do worry about that because it kind of sounds as if they approached him at the farm then went directly to the location of MT. Do they carry a recorder in their cars that they can use when a suspect starts talking? Would he even talk if he had a recorder going under those conditions?

Why I think he pinned himself in, it was initially reported that he blacked out as he USUALLY does when he gets upset. That is not an easily defendable statement as it implies he gets angry often and each time he doesn't recall what happens after his anger errupts. Clearly he is describing out of control rage / inability to control his own anger. That is in no way going to help his case. Anger in and of itself and one's inability to control it is not a mental illness so he can't exactly go with that as a defense can he. What it describes is a very dangerous and unpredictable person at that.

His latest version is he "blocked out". In my opinion there is very little difference in the terminology other then he got a little advise from his attorney. A weak attempt perhaps to make it appear he is remorseful and horrified about what happened or something similar to make him more sympathetic or normal to a jury OR imply a mental illness/brain damage or something. Either definition describes someone that has a serious problem and anger issues.
 
Last edited:
Mollie Tibbetts case: What we know about her accused killer

Here is the article I was hunting . UNDER the LIMITED ENGISH bullet . He would come to Brooklyn - wasn't every day it was 'every couple of days or so" to the Caseys.

"Rhonda Petersen, an employee at a Casey’s gas station in downtown Brooklyn, said Rivera would come into the store "every couple days or so" after work, get something to eat and leave. Peterson said she didn’t talk with him because he mostly spoke Spanish. She said she hasn’t seen him in Casey’s for "probably a couple weeks at least.""

Made me wonder how often Mollie's parents or family or friends or LE was at that Caseys following the abduction?
 
I think CR really pinned himself in during his "confession". I just hope they got him on tape. I do worry about that because it kind of sounds as if they approached him at the farm then went directly to the location of MT. Do they carry a recorder in their cars that they can use when a suspect starts talking? Would he even talk if he had a recorder going under those conditions?

Why I think he pinned himself in, it was initially reported that he blacked out as he USUALLY does when he gets upset. That is not an easily defendable statement as it implies he gets angry often and each time he doesn't recall what happens after his anger errupts. Clearly he is describing out of control rage and his inability to control his own anger. That is in no way going to help his case. Anger in and of itself and one's inability to control it is not a mental illness so he can't exactly go with that as a defense can he. What it describes is a very dangerous person and very unpredictable person at that.

His latest version is he "blocked out". In my opinion there is very little difference in the terminology other then he got a little advise from his attorney. A weak attempt perhaps to make it appear he is remorseful and horrified about what happened or something similar to make him more sympathetic or normal to a jury OR imply a mental illness/brain damage or something.
I’m sure that LE has the entire confession recorded. With federal and state involvement, there’s no way there would be that kind of oversight (not recording it).
 
So what will the defense be for this guy since he confessed? Obviously the lawyer is trying to paint a new picture of CR. Thoughts?
IMO his defense won't be that different from what he said in his confession - he followed her, he approached her, he blacked or blocked out how she ended up in his trunk with blood on her head, then he disposed of her body. I don't know if LE has a full confession (him admitting to killing her), maybe just the story he told them, which was incriminating enough for them to arrest and charge him, hallelujiah!
 
I think CR really pinned himself in during his "confession". I just hope they got him on tape. I do worry about that because it kind of sounds as if they approached him at the farm then went directly to the location of MT. Do they carry a recorder in their cars that they can use when a suspect starts talking? Would he even talk if he had a recorder going under those conditions?

Why I think he pinned himself in, it was initially reported that he blacked out as he USUALLY does when he gets upset. That is not an easily defendable statement as it implies he gets angry often and each time he doesn't recall what happens after his anger errupts. Clearly he is describing out of control rage and his inability to control his own anger. That is in no way going to help his case. Anger in and of itself and one's inability to control it is not a mental illness so he can't exactly go with that as a defense can he. What it describes is a very dangerous person and very unpredictable person at that.

His latest version is he "blocked out". In my opinion there is very little difference in the terminology other then he got a little advise from his attorney. A weak attempt perhaps to make it appear he is remorseful and horrified about what happened or something similar to make him more sympathetic or normal to a jury OR imply a mental illness/brain damage or something.
He had a translator. They handled this professionally. It's going to be hard for him to claim he didn't understand or that LE is lying.
 
It would also be interesting if that car was owned by his employer, Yarrabee Farms, for employees use.

Good Point.

There could be some liability involved if someone else owned the vehicle which is why Im wondering if it was even insured.

If the farm owned it I suppose they could keep insurance on it and other drivers would be covered under their insurance plan. But I think stipulations on who is covered would require a licensed driver so he was probably not covered unless he has his own insurance.
 
Imo, depending on the condition of the body it may show visible signs of trauma

I’m positive they will do everything they can to figure this out
I don't know if anyone has posted the link. I will try to find it. Appreciate some help if someone recalls that particular news story. It occurred just after his arrest. Someone who works at Caseys said "the man who claims to be CR" used to come in daily after work to get something to eat. She said he stopped coming about two weeks before his arrest. I wonder if that is when he would watch Mollie?
This is interesting. I wonder if there is a link.
 
The same thing happened with the Zimmerman case but he received a fair trial. It's pretty powerful when a popular president claims a victim could be his son. So a politician's opinion really doesn't seem to influence juries. Most jurers take jury duty very seriously.

I don't recall any declarations from the president about innocence or guilt in the Zimmerman case. Not that I think those comments will taint the jury pool to a level where Mr. Rivera can't get a fair trial in this case.
 
I am wondering the blocked/blacked out thing. Maybe CR thinks they are one in the same which would bring us back to he speaks English but might not understand the difference in words.
 
Definitely same line of thinking - that it would be very unusual that this is the first time he has interfered with women. If the suspect lived in a place like, for example, Blairstown, that opens the possibility that there are related crimes in the surrounding areas.
Just speculation but (when he first arrived in the US) he probably lived with the Uncle that attended court . It was said that uncle lived in a nearby town. I think we will find out soon enough, now that the media has at least one of the Uncle's names. I wonder if CR's last name is Radilla rather than Rivera.

Jmo
 
Mollie Tibbetts case: What we know about her accused killer

Here is the article I was hunting . UNDER the LIMITED ENGISH bullet . He would come to Brooklyn - wasn't every day it was 'every couple of days or so" to the Caseys.

"Rhonda Petersen, an employee at a Casey’s gas station in downtown Brooklyn, said Rivera would come into the store "every couple days or so" after work, get something to eat and leave. Peterson said she didn’t talk with him because he mostly spoke Spanish. She said she hasn’t seen him in Casey’s for "probably a couple weeks at least.""

Made me wonder how often Mollie's parents or family or friends or LE was at that Caseys following the abduction?

Interesting. So we know that there may be connections to Blairstown, Tama, and Marshalltown.
  • "IOWA FRIENDS: Rivera had multiple Facebook friends in Iowa, including some from Tama, Marshalltown and Brooklyn."
Suspect’s relatives say they’re baffled by arrest in Mollie Tibbetts case
 
I thought of that but most farms/ranches use pick-ups not cars. The trucks haul and pick up supplies and everything better than a car can.
It could have been a personal use vehicle the dad or son (owners ) used at one time. Very likely it was registered to the company even if personal use as it is a tax write off. Many friends of mine do the same. They could have updated their personal use car and donated this one to the workers for their off hour usage. A car also saves on gas so less expensive to drive which the owners may have thoughtfully considered for their workers. They had to eat so needed to shop for groceries, do laundry, go to the doctors whatever. Cheaper to fill up the car then a truck. The employees could be chipping in together for gas money.
 
and the warrant said he guided LE to the exact spot "from memory". He had to have been there many times to do this IMO. Those cornfields look alike. Don't killers sometimes visit ? I think I have read that and if LE is looking at video from before this happened to see if he was stalking her - surely they are looking at video after the 18th of July to see if he returned to this site assuming she was killed that night?

When you live in Iowa, every cornfield can look different. The corners are different, the road is different etc... When you get used to something, you can tell the differences. I grew up in Iowa and my friends would give me directions and I couldn't see the difference. There are subtle differences locals can see.
 
I have to respectfully disagree with you there. I replied to a post regarding a holster that can be worn while jogging for my daughter to keep her safer as we are rural also. Communities whose citizens are LEGALLY armed are not making said communities any unsafer as a matter of fact statistics bear out that gun free zones are LESS safe and more likely to experience shootings by people who are not law abiding legally licensed armed individuals. Most bad guys don't venture into areas where it's known people are armed.

Your comment implies that if people legally attain firearms they are going to be shooting willy nilly innocent people or each other and the death toll is going to mount. I believe this to be a completely inaccurate presumption. My husband and I are both licensed conceal carry. He shoots several times a week and is an avid shooter. I on the other hand have never shot nor held a loaded gun and am in fact deathly afraid of them. If the day comes I feel the need to shoot one I will go to the club and learn how to properly shoot and practice until I get it right. My daughter has already been told that she will need to shoot with her dad until he feels confident that she is capable of safely handling, carrying and shooting said weapon before she is allowed to leave the house with it. Most legal owners in fact do this as no one wants to shoot themselves by mistake or someone who happens to be near us. I know I will feel much calmer having my daughter go out fully capable of protecting herself from any CR who might cross her path.

It doesn't imply any of those things. You got there all on your own. He simply stated that it doesn't make the community safer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
1,578
Total visitors
1,713

Forum statistics

Threads
606,068
Messages
18,197,701
Members
233,721
Latest member
KiKi_T
Back
Top