Theory: Female half of couple in the park was TPS

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

no, can't see it. if it's tammi, it'd be obvious to ej, and i'd agree with above that she'd have told LE that it was tammi. no reason to protect tammi at all at this point.
 
Interesting theory - I'll bite :) What was TS alibi during the time GJ went missing? I really wouldn't put it past her (TS).

MOO

Mel
 
mgardner said:
Interesting theory - I'll bite :) What was TS alibi during the time GJ went missing? I really wouldn't put it past her (TS).

MOO

Mel
Click to expand...

How could she realistically have disguised herself
1) to fit the physical description, and
2) to fool Elizabeth with her facial expressions, voice, mannerisms, speech habits?

I mean, come on.
 
BeanE said:
How could she realistically have disguised herself
1) to fit the physical description, and
2) to fool Elizabeth with her facial expressions, voice, mannerisms, speech habits?

I mean, come on.
Click to expand...


I'm just really not totally convinced that EJ's description of this couple is truthful. I believe Tammi still has control over Elizabeth and maybe she has threatened Elizabeth that something bad will happen to Gabriel, her grandfather, or her brother, if she ever told anyone that it was Tammi & Jack in the park.
I don't think Tammi was in disguise, I think it's possible she was just Tammi and the whole story of a mystery couple is all made up to throw the investigation off.
 
momtective said:
I'm just really not totally convinced that EJ's description of this couple is truthful. I believe Tammi still has control over Elizabeth and maybe she has threatened Elizabeth that something bad will happen to Gabriel, her grandfather, or her brother, if she ever told anyone that it was Tammi & Jack in the park.
I don't think Tammi was in disguise, I think it's possible she was just Tammi and the whole story of a mystery couple is all made up to throw the investigation off.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That's more realistically workable to me. Although I don't think Tammi ever had control over Elizabeth - I don't think anyone can control Elizabeth.

A threat to harm is possible, but I think unlikely at this point. I think if Elizabeth did not kill Gabe, that she realizes her position, is angry at Tammi, and is telling the truth. She also cares far more about herself than she does about her grandfather, brother, or Gabe.

ETA: I'm going to change the OP to include Tammi not in disguise, but that EJ is lying about the description.

ETA again lol: I'm all in with Ken's theory of a third party and a couple, as supported by the journal, the EJ/Tammi phone conversation, and SS's conversations with EJ, with Tammi as the third party named by EJ in the EJ<>TPS phone call and conversations w/SS, and a separate couple.
 
saba said:
TS failed to appear in Scottsdale muni court on 12/24/2009- case: R-0751-PR-2009027329 http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/publicaccess/caselookup.aspx
Click to expand...

I'd suggest not reading too much into this. Not appearing is the common way to deal with traffic photo enforcement citations. It forces the state to personally serve the defendant, which they often do not, and then the rules of civil procedure require it to be dismissed (as this was).
 
momtective said:
I'm just really not totally convinced that EJ's description of this couple is truthful. I believe Tammi still has control over Elizabeth and maybe she has threatened Elizabeth that something bad will happen to Gabriel, her grandfather, or her brother, if she ever told anyone that it was Tammi & Jack in the park.
I don't think Tammi was in disguise, I think it's possible she was just Tammi and the whole story of a mystery couple is all made up to throw the investigation off.
Click to expand...

I think Kappy's point about the description of the couple in light weight clothes when it was cold outside raises a flag that the description may not be truthful. A polo shirt to me means collared, pullover short sleeve shirt it could be a long sleeve but you would think at least one of them would of been wearing a jacket. Low temp was 33, average was 48, high was 62. At 10AM, I'm thinking the temp would be somewhere between the low and average-coat weather.
 
TXHOPE said:
I think Kappy's point about the description of the couple in light weight clothes when it was cold outside raises a flag that the description may not be truthful. A polo shirt to me means collared, pullover short sleeve shirt it could be a long sleeve but you would think at least one of them would of been wearing a jacket. Low temp was 33, average was 48, high was 62. At 10AM, I'm thinking the temp would be somewhere between the low and average-coat weather.
Click to expand...

I checked the 10am weather, and the graph (linked previously) shows about 45 degrees at that time. I do have a concern at how lightly EJ described them to be dressed. If someone is wearing a coat or jacket, that's one of the first things I think that you mention about their clothing.

I can't account for the lack of heavier clothing, whether it's that they weren't wearing coats/jackets, or whether her description may be untrue. It is bothering me, because I can only think of one reasonable explanation she would be lying, and I don't like it.

ETA: weather link for that day at 10am in SA:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5164995&postcount=282"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Hand off of Gabriel at Raymond Rimkus Park[/ame]
 
I can't account for the lack of heavier clothing, whether it's that they weren't wearing coats/jackets, or whether her description may be untrue. It is bothering me, because I can only think of one reasonable explanation she would be lying, and I don't like it.
Click to expand...

Or she could be lying about the couples description because whether TS was involved or not she simply doesn't want Gabriel found, she doesn't want him to go back to Logan. She may think if she acts like she's providing all of the information that will be enough to get her off whether it's the truth or not.
 
BeanE said:
I checked the 10am weather, and the graph (linked previously) shows about 45 degrees at that time. I do have a concern at how lightly EJ described them to be dressed. If someone is wearing a coat or jacket, that's one of the first things I think that you mention about their clothing.

I can't account for the lack of heavier clothing, whether it's that they weren't wearing coats/jackets, or whether her description may be untrue. It is bothering me, because I can only think of one reasonable explanation she would be lying, and I don't like it.

ETA: weather link for that day at 10am in SA:
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Hand off of Gabriel at Raymond Rimkus Park
Click to expand...

Maybe they just drove from a warmer state, and sat in their car waiting, not expecting the chill when they got out? :waitasec:
 
kissdegirl said:
Maybe they just drove from a warmer state, and sat in their car waiting, not expecting the chill when they got out? :waitasec:
Click to expand...

Maybe but didn't Ken say they were waiting at a bench/picnic table with a car seat per her journal? They could be from a colder state, so 45 degrees was nothing to them. Here in TX that's cold but maybe not to someone from the North. :waitasec:
 
TXHOPE said:
Maybe but didn't Ken say they were waiting at a bench/picnic table with a car seat per her journal? They could be from a colder state, so 45 degrees was nothing to them. Here in TX that's cold but maybe not to someone from the North. :waitasec:
Click to expand...

Maybe they left their coats in the car.
 
BeanE said:
I checked the 10am weather, and the graph (linked previously) shows about 45 degrees at that time. I do have a concern at how lightly EJ described them to be dressed. If someone is wearing a coat or jacket, that's one of the first things I think that you mention about their clothing.

I can't account for the lack of heavier clothing, whether it's that they weren't wearing coats/jackets, or whether her description may be untrue. It is bothering me, because I can only think of one reasonable explanation she would be lying, and I don't like it.

ETA: weather link for that day at 10am in SA:
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Hand off of Gabriel at Raymond Rimkus Park
Click to expand...

based on the weather link provided, if I've read it correctly, the wind at that time was ENE 4.5 mph...would make it feel even cooler to me...
 
MO3Bcares said:
Maybe they left their coats in the car.
Click to expand...

But they took the carseat which should have been secured in the vehicle, out???
I always wondered why they would take the carseat to the park table...who does that unless it's for an infant? Most toddler carseats are fastened into the car and aren't removed regularly, right? Another oddity in EJ's story.
 
momtective said:
But they took the carseat which should have been secured in the vehicle, out???
I always wondered why they would take the carseat to the park table...who does that unless it's for an infant? Most toddler carseats are fastened into the car and aren't removed regularly, right? Another oddity in EJ's story.
Click to expand...

Didn't the carseat story come from Tammi? Tammi said Elizabeth said?
 
I thought Ken said the couple had the car seat on the park table? I thought that was odd as well but if it was an infant seat, they could of just pulled the carrier out of the car.

TS said EJ said the car seat was in the hotel room as part of the false story about the couple picking Gabriel up at the hotel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 186 more.
Total: 1,783 (members: 187, guests: 1,596)

Online statistics

Members online
187
Guests online
1,596
Total visitors
1,783
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,557
Messages
18,096,641
Members
230,878
Latest member
LVTRUCRIME
Back
Top