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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.

At the very end of the video, where her head is on Jerrett Rose's shoulder and his head is on her head, they're wearing red tshirts. The tshirts must be a uniform, has their work logo and name on them, for when they go on outings? It looks like they're riding in a school bus. That must be the tshirt that is missing and that she was due to wear the day she didn't show up for work and was reported missing. Since they were going to the fair that day.

Random thing I noticed- Mollie's boyfriend is wearing a short sleeve shirt in the interview. His arms and hands look good lol
 
Last edited:
I wonder if they found anything on her computer?? Would they be done with that by now?



This is 4 months into the search for Holly but they're on the Today Show asking for help from locals, did anyone see anything- also asking for help from President Obama- to send more help. I watched the trial and it was a true nightmare and heartbreaking. I wonder if Mollie's family couldn't do the same.

Holly Bobo's mom makes plea to Obama for help
I always felt they knew more than they eluded to. (because LE told them) However and of course they did want their daughter found. I never had one single suspicion of them. They were and are good people. I felt and feel so sorry for them.
 
BBM- I think LE was given permission to search the home, and they did early on. However, a search warrant guarantees that evidence collected cannot be called into question later. I'm sure the FBI insisted on the warrant once they became involved.
BBM- I think LE was given permission to search the home, and they did early on. However, a search warrant guarantees that evidence collected cannot be called into question later. I'm sure the FBI insisted on the warrant once they became involved.

Search warrants IMO specify specific locations and evidence sought. Just asking if we can look around supposes the property owner agrees. Not agreeing is a bad sign. Evidence found either way could be introduced into court.
 
I couldn't open the 2nd article but that's pretty interesting in the 1st article that they are saying to be on the lookout for her in Utah as she has family there. Do they think she ran away? Or are they just throwing that out there as an option?
I think it's creepy because she also has family connections in Oakland, CA and the sheriff didn't mention that people near Oakland should watch for her.
 
Search warrants IMO specify specific locations and evidence sought. Just asking if we can look around supposes the property owner agrees. Not agreeing is a bad sign. Evidence found either way could be introduced into court.
Right. They need to collect the evidence in a professional manner to present to the courts if need be. There is a protocol.
If someone was missing from my home I would give investigators carte blanche. But they need to follow protocol in case I found myself in a situation I needed to dispute it.
 
Search warrants IMO specify specific locations and evidence sought. Just asking if we can look around supposes the property owner agrees. Not agreeing is a bad sign. Evidence found either way could be introduced into court.
There is no evidence that the brother didn't agree to have his house searched. Law enforcement routinely gets search warrants even when property owners give verbal permission. And evidence seized without a search warrant can be disputed. Giving permission to search a house is vague. If something is found in the house's garage, the defense attorney will try to have that evidence tossed saying the garage is not the house. A search warrant is very specific listing all rooms, closets, basement, sheds, attics, garages, and etc... With specific areas listed, evidence found in these areas can't get tossed out of the courtroom.
 
I just keep thinking this was a stalker.
I've studied and my daughter was a victim of stalking. I hope I'm wrong but that's what this is making me think of. A stalker......could very well be a person known to her, but nonetheless a stalker.
 
Thoughts on SM that replying to a specific post above is tough -
1) Asked my daughter about Snapchat and time sent. There seems to be a time sent on top right arrow of screen of receiver. Swipe past post and you don't see it.
2) Can send a picture from the past/gallery not a pic taken real time.
3. Time when send and receiver sees it is different.

I think back to the Frasina case when the teen soccer player ran off with her coach. No one knew except some friends had inside suspisions. They communicated on snapchat. She left her phone home thinking it was wiped but SC saved posts to the device card that the father moved to another phone and recovered. Everything is recoverable. Would be interesting if th BF surrendered his phone.
 
I just keep thinking this was a stalker.
I've studied and my daughter was a victim of stalking. I hope I'm wrong but that's what this is making me think of. A stalker......could very well be a person known to her, but nonetheless a stalker.
Someone was watching this pretty female and knew when the construction trucks weren't at that house, the others residents were gone and she was alone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
1,627
Total visitors
1,710

Forum statistics

Threads
600,066
Messages
18,103,257
Members
230,982
Latest member
mconnectseo
Back
Top