CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #11

[Nikynoo]

Based on procedure* below, I'm wonder if this is correct interpretation.
1. As SanBern Sheriff's Dept took initial BT MisPers report, then ---
2. SBSD respon. for notifying & sending copies of MP rpt to dept w jurisdiction over BT's residence.
... ?: Bullhead City PD or Mohave County AZ sheriff? Or?
3. "Recommended" initial MP investigation "should be handled by" SBSD (place MP last seen).
4. SBSD respons. for entering MP info into (Calif) DoJ's MP data base.
5. SBSD respons. for "coordinating a bilateral investigation" w dept w jurisdiction over BT's residence.
...?: Again, BH City PD or Mohave County AZ sheriff? Or?
6. After SBSD exhausts all investigative leads, "should" transfer case to dept w jurisdiction over BT's residence.
....?: Again, BH City PD or Mohave County AZ sheriff? Or?
a) Inc. making computer note in (Calif) MP system to show which agency is respons. for investigation.
7. SBSD should route all future leads to agency w jurisdiction, based on MP residence.
"...imperative that all agencies involved in MP investigation work closely together."
^jmo
Sooooo,
Q1: Has SBSD exhausted all investigative leads?
Q2: Is investigation still in hands of SBSD? Or another agency?
Q3: Has either BH City PD or Mojave County AZ made any stmt on this case?

-------------------------------------------------------
* https://post.ca.gov/Portals/0/post_docs/publications/Missing_Persons_Investigations.pdf
"Missing Persons Investigations
Section 4. Follow Up Investigation
PC Sec 14205 c) requires the agency taking the initial missing persons report “to promptly notify” and send copies of the report to the department that has jurisdiction over the missing person’s resident address and to the agency where the missing person was last seen.
"It is recommended that the initial investigation should be handled by the agency of jurisdiction where the missing person was last seen. This includes entry of the missing person into the Department of Justice’s MPS (Missing Persons System) and coordinating a bilateral investigation with the agency of the missing person’s residence. Once this agency has exhausted all investigative leads, the case should be transferred to the agency that has jurisdiction over the missing person’s residence. This would include making the proper computer notation with the Department of Justice as to the agency responsible for the investigation. Any future leads should be routed to the agency with jurisdiction based on the missing person’s residence. It is imperative that all agencies involved in the missing person investigation work closely together, enhancing the probability of locating the missing person."
bbm

BBM and copied over for clarity:
Q1: Has SBSD exhausted all investigative leads?
Q2: Is investigation still in hands of SBSD? Or another agency?
Q3: Has either BH City PD or Mojave County AZ made any stmt on this case?

Thanks @al66pine for following up on this.
Is it worth @dbdb11 contacing LE in Bull Head City for an update and/or a FOI request?

 

[MsBetsy]

There is not just one trail though.

Yes, at least one poster said they attempted to follow the same trail to the Rock formations, and on the way back took a wrong path, got lost, and ended up somewhere near the road, and then had to follow the road back.

Imo

 

[MsBetsy]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

Well, the problem is that they searched extensively, using all the resources available to them, and were not able to find any trace of her.
It was very hot back then but they did say if any evidence turns up they will search accordingly.
I think it would be worth it though if another search team went out there now that it's cooler.
There have been many cases where a missing person has been found much later in the same area that had been searched previously, or someone has stumbled on the remains even years later. Imo

 

[Cherwell]

Fruitless ?
A sad adjective.
No, hopefully not.
Don't really think it's useless or unproductive, since different articles have information that's sometimes at odds with other msm sources.
We are trying to find out the truth , and maybe we're a bit closer to what happened ?
One can always hope.
I think I know what you mean.
Part of what we're discussing is due to the fact that so many details were never made clear.
Fully agree with you -- that we don't know what he said to LE , nor do we know what they said or asked him.

I mean that it's pointless drawing conclusions (such as order of events) from picking over what he said in the media interview (which will have been edited down) and what he said in the phone call to Hong Kong, for which we only have a partial paraphrase.

I'm sure we can all recall conversations we had ourselves in which we've missed things out, or got things in the wrong order. This inevitably happens. Even if you are mentally prepared, you can easily be derailed by someone interrupting or asking a question. Unless you write down a carefully prepared statement, and stick to it, there are likely to be omissions and misunderstandings.

In this case the definitive statements will have been obtained by the police, and unfortunately we are not privy to that.

 

[Cherwell]

Well, the problem is that they searched extensively, using all the resources available to them, and were not able to find any trace of her.
It was very hot back then but they did say if any evidence turns up they will search accordingly.
I think it would be worth it though if another search team went out there now that it's cooler.
There have been many cases where a missing person has been found much later in the same area that had been searched previously, or someone has stumbled on the remains even years later. Imo

Yes, and I've seen it said that the vegetation has been particularly luxuriant and dense this summer, so perhaps conditions will be a lot more favourable in the winter.

 

[Chingaling]

Yes, and I've seen it said that the vegetation has been particularly luxuriant and dense this summer, so perhaps conditions will be a lot more favourable in the winter.

Which is even more of a reason not to go off trail if you are almost naked.

 

[anneg]

I mean that it's pointless drawing conclusions (such as order of events) from picking over what he said in the media interview (which will have been edited down) and what he said in the phone call to Hong Kong, for which we only have a partial paraphrase.

I'm sure we can all recall conversations we had ourselves in which we've missed things out, or got things in the wrong order. This inevitably happens. Even if you are mentally prepared, you can easily be derailed by someone interrupting or asking a question. Unless you write down a carefully prepared statement, and stick to it, there are likely to be omissions and misunderstandings.

In this case the definitive statements will have been obtained by the police, and unfortunately we are not privy to that.

I agree. And the discrepancies between the timeline RT apparently gave to BT's family in Hong Kong several days after BT disappeared, and what RT said in his interview(s?), plus the few timeline data points we have, continue to be very troubling to me. Our VI @dbdb11 has plainly stated that RT has not been honest about what happened that day.

Bear with me while I lay this out yet again...

--RT told BT's family members (if we can have confidence in the VI's sister's recall of what RT said on that phone call) that "by around noon time it was getting terribly hot so he started getting worried and called 911." We know he actually called around 3:30 p.m. west coast time. It sure would be nice to have this major time discrepancy clarified.

--The only timeline data points we can really be confident about (I think!) include the sighting of BT when she dropped her dog off at the kennel not long after 8 a.m., the sighting via the neighbor's security camera of the Thomases leaving in the truck and camper around 8:15 a.m. (not sure if there was a live sighting of their departure), the sighting of RT only at the gas station in the Needles area around 9 a.m., and the 911 call logged at around 3:30 p.m.

--Otherwise, the answer to most any question about that day is "We don't know." Unfortunately.

Edited to add: MY OPINION ONLY!

 

[muddlehead]

<modsnip>

1/4 Mile.

RT said he last saw his wife when she was 1/4 mile from the RV.

The RV was in sight. It was right over there. Barbara could see it.

They were not wandering, aimlessly in the vast desert as their mental acuities and physical well beings were disintegrating under the hot sun.

<modsnip: Telling other members what to say or do is not allowed>

 

[Stripehaven]

Yes, at least one poster said they attempted to follow the same trail to the Rock formations, and on the way back took a wrong path, got lost, and ended up somewhere near the road, and then had to follow the road back.

Imo

But that doesn’t sound like actually getting lost IMO; you could follow the road back to the RV. Even if you went the wrong way, it seems you’d eventually realize it and/or be spotted by a car. Unless you were somehow impaired, which is why I’ve wondered here a couple of times whether they were drinking more than just one beer that morning, or if they’re typically enthusiastic drinkers while they’re out and about.

I’m NOT saying BT was drinking to excess, but I do wonder. IF she was there that day, and IF she drinks while hiking, was there enough beer involved to impair judgment?

Getting totally lost and undetectable OR ABDUCTED in this locale and under the scenario RT describes seems IMO so very, very unlikely. So I question just about every reported detail.

 

[al66pine]

BBM and copied over for clarity:
Q1: Has SBSD exhausted all investigative leads?
Q2: Is investigation still in hands of SBSD? Or another agency?
Q3: Has either BH City PD or Mojave County AZ made any stmt on this case)

Thanks @al66pine for following up on this.
Is it worth @dbdb11 contacing LE in Bull Head City for an update and/or a FOI request?

{{from my/al66pine OP) BBM and copied over for clarity:
Q1: Has SBSD exhausted all investigative leads?
Q2: Is investigation still in hands of SBSD? Or another agency?
Q3: Has either BH City PD or Mojave County AZ made any stmt on this case?}}

Thanks @al66pine for following up on this.
Is it worth @dbdb11 contacing LE in Bull Head City for an update and/or a FOI request

@Nikynoo seems like it could be worth a try. Seems @dbdb11 could learn if either of those two AZ agencies have a file open on BT as missing person.
Since CA statute applies to LE-agencies and directs them to take specific steps re MPs, I wonder if a CA agency (SBSD?) might take the position that it is not required to notify out of state agency. I would hope not.
I have not tried to sort thru which AZ agency would have jurisdiction over MP case. What I understand as general principle is LE authority is at county level, but I am not assuming (because we now what happens w that). jmo.

 

[cazador]

I agree on 2 things..

1. A call to LE ... The Sheriff name and number is located in many news articles posted. Find out if there is any new info they can share that would aid in a new search effort.
Our desire is to know where RT was standing and where BT was standing when RT lost sight of BT.

2. A new search effort by volunteers. Beginning with where RT lost sight of BT.
IF LE wont give the info on where they were standing then there is only one choice..
That info will only come from direct contact with RT asking for his "Guidance" So that those searching get off on the right foot. Then searchers can use their own "Common Sense" to determine all possible directions BT could have walked..

 

[10ofRods]

I mean that it's pointless drawing conclusions (such as order of events) from picking over what he said in the media interview (which will have been edited down) and what he said in the phone call to Hong Kong, for which we only have a partial paraphrase.

I'm sure we can all recall conversations we had ourselves in which we've missed things out, or got things in the wrong order. This inevitably happens. Even if you are mentally prepared, you can easily be derailed by someone interrupting or asking a question. Unless you write down a carefully prepared statement, and stick to it, there are likely to be omissions and misunderstandings.

In this case the definitive statements will have been obtained by the police, and unfortunately we are not privy to that.

Well, logic dictates that he could not have noticed she was missing until he got to the RV. So he would not have been hollering and waving his arms the instant he put his camera equipment away. He also says, I was taking a picture, she went around a corner, that's the last I saw of her.

I am not sure why it matters, but it has to go like this

1. They separate (he is either still taking pictures or is putting his stuff away).
2. He watches her walk (probably to the trail intersection, where the trail "curves" and he would not be able to see her - at any rate, not on a short, straight shot-to-the-RV trail where he could see her the whole time)
3. He gets to the RV, sees the key is still under rock, no Barbara.

That's when he notices she is gone. She could be on either side of the road (if not abducted).

But what if she was abducted? We hardly ever consider the possibility here, because that would mean saying LE is wrong in their assessment. But stranger things have happened. I do realize the odds are very much against such an event. Still, every hypothesis is worth examining in a case like this one.

Anyway, it would be strange/impossible for RT to start hollering before he realized she was missing. So he had to be back at the parking area, IMO.

The two sides of the road are different. The RV would not have been visible from every segment of every possible trail (and she could have walked up HH Road for a potty break). Two roads, several trails, many actions that Barbara could have taken, some of them could have resulted in her becoming lost. If heat was a factor in her decision to return (and I bet it was), then she may have experienced cognitive issues (at least brain fog) soon after she left RT. We just don't know.

 

[Hatfield]

I agree. And the discrepancies between the timeline RT apparently gave to BT's family in Hong Kong several days after BT disappeared, and what RT said in his interview(s?), plus the few timeline data points we have, continue to be very troubling to me. Our VI @dbdb11 has plainly stated that RT has not been honest about what happened that day.

Bear with me while I lay this out yet again...

--RT told BT's family members (if we can have confidence in the VI's sister's recall of what RT said on that phone call) that "by around noon time it was getting terribly hot so he started getting worried and called 911." We know he actually called around 3:30 p.m. west coast time. It sure would be nice to have this major time discrepancy clarified.

--The only timeline data points we can really be confident about (I think!) include the sighting of BT when she dropped her dog off at the kennel not long after 8 a.m., the sighting via the neighbor's security camera of the Thomases leaving in the truck and camper around 8:15 a.m. (not sure if there was a live sighting of their departure), the sighting of RT only at the gas station in the Needles area around 9 a.m., and the 911 call logged at around 3:30 p.m.

--Otherwise, the answer to most any question about that day is "We don't know." Unfortunately.

Edited to add: MY OPINION ONLY!

Re BBM
Interesting about the sighting of her dropping her dog off.

JMO
If that is accurate that she was seen dropping off her dog then it seems to me that if he had pre-planned her demise then that witness would be important to talk to.

Whenever dropping off dogs at the Vet, and a married couple, I am guessing that usually both go in to the Vet to help get the dog checked in and say last good byes to the dog. At least I would always accompany my partner.

If I was the VI I would personally contact that Vet and try to talk to the witness. I would try to see if the witness noticed anything strange about his behavior or even if he wasnt spotted at all then that would be interesting to me. Because why would anyone want to stay in the vehicle and make the other person take the dog in by herself to get all checked in.

I would also personally contact the Gas Station for similar reasons and try to speak to the person that saw him. Just to see if there is anything more that can be learned from the sighting.

One possibility that I keep coming back to but now I have just realized this is probably not what happened and Ill explain why it probably could not have happened this way after I first describe it.

The thought was maybe they had an argument near where he wanted to take pictures. It seems a likely place if an argument ensued because that is where he says they separated. She may have been ready to leave and he may have wanted to stay and maybe a serious argument occurred where she purposely left him and went to the cave to stay away from him for a bit. Or maybe she was so mad she just went to the road and flagged down the first person that could get her out of there. Now if an argument was serious enough he may have even got back to the RV and drove off to leave her there to purposely make her worry he really left, with his intentions to come back a little later and when he got back she may have been gone. She may have flagged down a stranger thinking he wasnt coming back.

Now here is why I think that is not likely. Because he would have lied to police and left out the whole argument thing and then if she did turn up in the days afterward then he would have some serious explaining to do to LE about why he lied about the events that day near the rocky hills in the desert.

I think trying to talk to the witnesses at the dog boarding place and the gas station would be worth trying to do. It may uncover a clue that could be important. What bothers me about the sightings is that both of them were not seen together. It seems they both should have been spotted together at least once that morning.

This case is becoming just as frustrating if not more than the Joshua Tree missing man case I have been following.

 

[LietKynes]

I mean that it's pointless drawing conclusions (such as order of events) from picking over what he said in the media interview (which will have been edited down) and what he said in the phone call to Hong Kong, for which we only have a partial paraphrase.

I'm sure we can all recall conversations we had ourselves in which we've missed things out, or got things in the wrong order. This inevitably happens. Even if you are mentally prepared, you can easily be derailed by someone interrupting or asking a question. Unless you write down a carefully prepared statement, and stick to it, there are likely to be omissions and misunderstandings.

In this case the definitive statements will have been obtained by the police, and unfortunately we are not privy to that.

Yes, I understand, and agree with you about misremembering or leaving things out of an interview.
I was mainly musing out loud.

I think that when something traumatic happens that the events of that day stand out with a terrible clarity.
There shouldn't have been changing or vague details. Just my .02.

As far as wanting some more information myself -- I'd like to know where he stood to take the photo, after which he was putting his camera equipment away.
Could the public see the photo ?
Because it would give a sense of how far they were from the RV (I know it was 1/4th mile) and what the terrain was like.
There is a ton of evidence we don't know as it hasn't been released.

The little girl who has been thankfully recovered ,who'd been abducted from a playground -- her kidnappers' photo was shown by the next morning.
No hesitation from LE to release photographic proof.

Were there security cameras at the kennel, inside and/or outside ? And can we see them ?
Anything would help at this time as the case seems to be grinding to a halt.
Very sad.

 

[Curiousobserver]

It is fruitless to nit-pick the statements, such as they are. We do not know what he said to the police, and we can be certain that they would have got him to clarify anything that seemed contradictory or didn't make sense.

Exactly- we are scrutinizing first, second, and third hand accounts of statements and descriptions of actions taken out of context and treating them as if they were proven facts.

Everyone is going to have to wait for more actual evidence.

 

[LietKynes]

Re BBM
Interesting about the sighting of her dropping her dog off.

JMO
If that is accurate that she was seen dropping off her dog then it seems to me that if he had pre-planned her demise then that witness would be important to talk to.

Whenever dropping off dogs at the Vet, and a married couple, I am guessing that usually both go in to the Vet to help get the dog checked in and say last good byes to the dog. At least I would always accompany my partner.

If I was the VI I would personally contact that Vet and try to talk to the witness. I would try to see if the witness noticed anything strange about his behavior or even if he wasnt spotted at all then that would be interesting to me. Because why would anyone want to stay in the vehicle and make the other person take the dog in by herself to get all checked in.

I would also personally contact the Gas Station for similar reasons and try to speak to the person that saw him. Just to see if there is anything more that can be learned from the sighting.

One possibility that I keep coming back to but now I have just realized this is probably not what happened and Ill explain why it probably could not have happened this way after I first describe it.

The thought was maybe they had an argument near where he wanted to take pictures. It seems a likely place if an argument ensued because that is where he says they separated. She may have been ready to leave and he may have wanted to stay and maybe a serious argument occurred where she purposely left him and went to the cave to stay away from him for a bit. Or maybe she was so mad she just went to the road and flagged down the first person that could get her out of there. Now if an argument was serious enough he may have even got back to the RV and drove off to leave her there to purposely make her worry he really left, with his intentions to come back a little later and when he got back she may have been gone. She may have flagged down a stranger thinking he wasnt coming back.

Now here is why I think that is not likely. Because he would have lied to police and left out the whole argument thing and then if she did turn up in the days afterward then he would have some serious explaining to do to LE about why he lied about the events that day near the rocky hills in the desert.

I think trying to talk to the witnesses at the dog boarding place and the gas station would be worth trying to do. It may uncover a clue that could be important. What bothers me about the sightings is that both of them were not seen together. It seems they both should have been spotted together at least once that morning.

This case is becoming just as frustrating if not more than the Joshua Tree missing man case I have been following.

Great post !
A good idea for those who live close enough -- to speak to the gas station employee and the dog kennel employees.
The more time passes, people are going to forget what was said or how people were acting.
Imo.

 

[Curiousobserver]

Well, logic dictates that he could not have noticed she was missing until he got to the RV. So he would not have been hollering and waving his arms the instant he put his camera equipment away. He also says, I was taking a picture, she went around a corner, that's the last I saw of her.

I am not sure why it matters, but it has to go like this

1. They separate (he is either still taking pictures or is putting his stuff away).
2. He watches her walk (probably to the trail intersection, where the trail "curves" and he would not be able to see her - at any rate, not on a short, straight shot-to-the-RV trail where he could see her the whole time)
3. He gets to the RV, sees the key is still under rock, no Barbara.

That's when he notices she is gone. She could be on either side of the road (if not abducted).

But what if she was abducted? We hardly ever consider the possibility here, because that would mean saying LE is wrong in their assessment. But stranger things have happened. I do realize the odds are very much against such an event. Still, every hypothesis is worth examining in a case like this one.

Anyway, it would be strange/impossible for RT to start hollering before he realized she was missing. So he had to be back at the parking area, IMO.

The two sides of the road are different. The RV would not have been visible from every segment of every possible trail (and she could have walked up HH Road for a potty break). Two roads, several trails, many actions that Barbara could have taken, some of them could have resulted in her becoming lost. If heat was a factor in her decision to return (and I bet it was), then she may have experienced cognitive issues (at least brain fog) soon after she left RT. We just don't know.

I appreciate your posts, you think like a scientist.

About the abduction- stranger things have happened and it reminds me of the case of the scientist in Greece. She was hit by the car to incapacitate her then driven elsewhere to be raped and killed. She was a 60 year old martial arts expert.

Suzanne Eaton

1/4 mile or 5-10 minutes ahead would be more than enough time to stop and grab someone and drive away undetected.

Of the three possibilities (lost, murdered, abducted) I put that one last but...

Whatever happened we don't have enough evidence to figure it out yet (and neither do the police).

I agree that it seems like, if she got lost, she would have found her way to the road or realized she was lost and back-tracked. However, there is a lot we don't know and the error bars around what we do know are large.

We don't know exactly how far away they were from each other, from the RV, or how long they were separated.

We don't know the time stamps on the pictures that were taken and if she appears in any of them.

We don't know if there were other hikers/campers nearby (none have come forward).

We don't know for sure if she knew where the RV was relative to where thy separated or if she could see it.

We don't know if her eyesight, or hearing is normal.

We don't know if she had 1 beer of 4 beers.

We don't know if they had an argument and she stormed off angry and perhaps not paying attention.

 

[Hatfield]

JMO
One other thing that I cant shake off about the statements he made, and from experience being on hilly open mountainous areas like that and being further up on the hill/mountain than the other person.

"He claimed that she had turned a corner"

Well, sorry but there is no real "corners" per se in my book. Sure, there are areas where a person below you can veer off and be hidden from view by a boulder or rock formation but there are usually no true corners per se. And when you are above a person like that then usually as soon as they walk a little further down they come into view again. The only time I could not see a person below me for any length of time was when the area we were in was heavily wooded. This area does not sound like it had many trees at all, but it did have lots of large boulders and those can inhibit view of someone below you. But usually not for very long if they continue to go down. If they go sideways then yeah they can stay hidden behind boulders but usually if they go downward they come right back into view once they clear the boulders.

So I struggle with the way that statement was phrased. Probably just semantics in wording.

Cops dismiss husband's claim that his bikini-clad wife who went missing during their hike was abducted

 

[anneg]

Re BBM
Interesting about the sighting of her dropping her dog off.

JMO
If that is accurate that she was seen dropping off her dog then it seems to me that if he had pre-planned her demise then that witness would be important to talk to.

Whenever dropping off dogs at the Vet, and a married couple, I am guessing that usually both go in to the Vet to help get the dog checked in and say last good byes to the dog. At least I would always accompany my partner.

If I was the VI I would personally contact that Vet and try to talk to the witness. I would try to see if the witness noticed anything strange about his behavior or even if he wasnt spotted at all then that would be interesting to me. Because why would anyone want to stay in the vehicle and make the other person take the dog in by herself to get all checked in.

I would also personally contact the Gas Station for similar reasons and try to speak to the person that saw him. Just to see if there is anything more that can be learned from the sighting.

One possibility that I keep coming back to but now I have just realized this is probably not what happened and Ill explain why it probably could not have happened this way after I first describe it.

The thought was maybe they had an argument near where he wanted to take pictures. It seems a likely place if an argument ensued because that is where he says they separated. She may have been ready to leave and he may have wanted to stay and maybe a serious argument occurred where she purposely left him and went to the cave to stay away from him for a bit. Or maybe she was so mad she just went to the road and flagged down the first person that could get her out of there. Now if an argument was serious enough he may have even got back to the RV and drove off to leave her there to purposely make her worry he really left, with his intentions to come back a little later and when he got back she may have been gone. She may have flagged down a stranger thinking he wasnt coming back.

Now here is why I think that is not likely. Because he would have lied to police and left out the whole argument thing and then if she did turn up in the days afterward then he would have some serious explaining to do to LE about why he lied about the events that day near the rocky hills in the desert.

I think trying to talk to the witnesses at the dog boarding place and the gas station would be worth trying to do. It may uncover a clue that could be important. What bothers me about the sightings is that both of them were not seen together. It seems they both should have been spotted together at least once that morning.

This case is becoming just as frustrating if not more than the Joshua Tree missing man case I have been following.

Thanks for your reply. The VI did talk with one or two staff members at the kennel, as I understand it, and he spoke with the clerk at the gas station who interacted with RT. Sorry not to have the links handy to his posts discussing these contacts, but if you search dbdb11's posts, it should be possible to find them. IIRC, BT was said by one staff member to be "aggravated" at the kennel, and RT was described as "naggy" at the gas station--suggesting that they both were not in a good mood at the beginning of this trip.

So it seems they may have been arguing about something (or more than one thing) during the course of that day.

It has been speculated in this thread that when RT talked with LE and was told his polygraph was "deceptive," the reason could have been that he withheld comments about argument(s) prior to Barb's disappearance.

MOO

 

[anneg]

<modsnip>

1/4 Mile.

RT said he last saw his wife when she was 1/4 mile from the RV.

The RV was in sight. It was right over there. Barbara could see it.

They were not wandering, aimlessly in the vast desert as their mental acuities and physical well beings were disintegrating under the hot sun.

<modsnip: Telling other members what to say or do is not allowed>

Regarding 1/4 mile--unfortunately we have only RT's comments about how far they were from the RV to go on. We don't know where he last saw Barbara, nor do we know what he told LE about that.