CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #7

[10ofRods]

I also wonder if the media had any influence in the kidnapping theory.
Once it was clear there was no evidence of an abduction, they seemed to lose all interest in the case. Imo

That always happens. There was a young woman missing from my town, and she was very pretty. Two days of coverage, then nothing. She was eventually found safe and that got a no-picture one-paragraph back page mention.

 

[Jade]

SBM

I believe the family members posted on social media prior to the SO statement, and media reports.

By all indications the Thomas’s were not on Facebook nor has there been any social media trail so it seems a stretch that Robert would be up to the minute on their page.


Was it a public Facebook? If not is there any proof that Robert followed the family Facebook?


Inyo County is what 5 hours 300 miles away from Mojave? I don’t get the leap to Robert being so interested in SP’s case.


The stories aren’t even the same in the least. Car verses back country creeper. Desolate campsite and well-traveled road.


I can find the abducted from the road viable it is more, to me, the way it was presented by RT.


All imo

 

[LietKynes]

fair enough.

but if i say she could have been waiting for him just beyond his line of sight, or robert may have already finished 'packing' his camera away and decided to walk back in the opposite direction of the RV to see how long he could make his shadow under the midday sun...

that doesnt clear things up. that kicks up mud and silt. according to roberts account, which imo has some issues, he stopped to take a pic. he asked her to wait. he was done putting away his 'gear' when she rounded the corner and 'that was the last he ever saw if her'.

so yes, adding speculation about her being a quarter hour ahead rather than a quarter mile ahead is not helpful. adding baseless speculation by thread # seven no less is detrimental to progress. we already know roberts story could be hogwash. if we base understanding on what RT has so far said, why add baseless queries like this? to what end is it useful in finding barb?

BBM

Excellent post, @dbdb11 .

A large part of the problem in finding Barbara is that Robert Thomas' account has more holes than swiss cheese.
LE found no evidence that there was an abduction. And no evidence that Barbara was at the exact locations R.T. said she was at.
His story made no sense from the beginning.
People at WS and elsewhere have continually given R.T. the benefit of the doubt ; and tried to take his silly account seriously.

Time to man up and help find Barbara.
Where is the evidence that Barbara was even at that location ?
R.T will not even tell LE where they may have stopped at that day, starting after they left home.
There is no proof that Barbara was at the specific desert location where R.T. said they were.
SAR dogs did not find a scent of her at the trail they'd been walking.

I will concede that Barbara could be at a different location in that desert, though.
Just not where R.T. said they were. He will not even provide LE with the photos he took of the rocks ; and any other photographic proof.

Just a few clues could help locate Barbara !

 

[10ofRods]

If RT really wanted to find Barbara, even though he's lawyered up, he'd aid in search efforts by being very clear about their route. He would not rely entirely on LE, but would appeal to the public (who goes out there to recreate) to look for Barbara. He'd ask the people who work at Kelso Depot to put up pictures with the exact spots they visited (his pictures, obviously).

However, he has stated she disappeared in a specific spot (that he will not fully describe to the public). People posting here have mentioned that if they were lost, they might go back to a point where they recognized something (like the granite outcropping). So RT should at least provide a picture of it. He doesn't know whether she was slowly becoming confused due to heat.

By insisting she was abducted, though, he doesn't have to do any of that. And by saying LE considers him a suspect, he has an excuse to lawyer up.

Most of us, if our beloved spouses were missing, would (even if we were suspects) be doing all we could, on every avenue, to find our spouse. Even if I thought DH had been abducted, I'd still be looking at the "DH is lost" angle, intensely.

I think that many of us are troubled by all of this and feel helpless to do much.

We either take RT's words as truth or we consider the alternative (that his account may not contain much information helpful to finding Barbara...) I have said many times that he misspent his televised time by not getting useful details out. He could change that immediately, if he wanted to.

 

[LAhiker]

BBM

Excellent post, @dbdb11 .

A large part of the problem in finding Barbara is that Robert Thomas' account has more holes than swiss cheese.
LE found no evidence that there was an abduction. And no evidence that Barbara was at the exact locations R.T. said she was at.
His story made no sense from the beginning.
People at WS and elsewhere have continually given R.T. the benefit of the doubt ; and tried to take his silly account seriously.

Time to man up and help find Barbara.
Where is the evidence that Barbara was even at that location ?
R.T will not even tell LE where they may have stopped at that day, starting after they left home.
There is no proof that Barbara was at the specific desert location where R.T. said they were.
SAR dogs did not find a scent of her at the trail they'd been walking.

I will concede that Barbara could be at a different location in that desert, though.
Just not where R.T. said they were. He will not even provide LE with the photos he took of the rocks ; and any other photographic proof.

Just a few clues could help locate Barbara !

While I agree with much of what you say, the case detective told our VI that the photos showed that RT & BT were there where and when RT said they were. (The VI says he hasn't seen the photos.) As I've argued earlier in this thread, we don't know exactly when or precisely where the photos were taken. But everything else you say is true, so not sure what to make of this, except that the exact timeline may be relevant. JMO

 

[HongKongPhooey]

fair enough.

but if i say she could have been waiting for him just beyond his line of sight, or robert may have already finished 'packing' his camera away and decided to walk back in the opposite direction of the RV to see how long he could make his shadow under the midday sun...

that doesnt clear things up. that kicks up mud and silt. according to roberts account, which imo has some issues, he stopped to take a pic. he asked her to wait. he was done putting away his 'gear' when she rounded the corner and 'that was the last he ever saw if her'.

so yes, adding speculation about her being a quarter hour ahead rather than a quarter mile ahead is not helpful. adding baseless speculation by thread # seven no less is detrimental to progress. we already know roberts story could be hogwash. if we base understanding on what RT has so far said, why add baseless queries like this? to what end is it useful in finding barb?

I agree exactly with what you're saying.

WS is a great place to speculate however if people omit to add their IMOs and MOOs etc there is a risk that individual, as you call it, baseless speculation, is taken as factual by new thread readers. And that can skew the narrative significantly and ultimately affect where our investigative journey takes us.

What's important here are the facts as we know them.

Our interpretation of them will differ, but only some interpretations are understandably acceptable according TOS. It can also make it tricky challenging opposing interpretations. Which means many of us may be keeping our opinions away from the MT and digging around for more facts.

Barb is out there somewhere. Sadly I dont think estimating how long it takes to dismantle equipment, walk round a corner, or go back to a RV will find her.

Just my opinion

 

[katydid23]

To the question "How far was BT from the RV when she disappeared?"
No one can answer that, or they would not have performed searches in a large area for 10 days.

To the other question, no one can answer that too, since she was never found. Do you consider her missing the moment she took a corner, or the moment she may have walked into a different direction not able to find her way back, the moment someone took her or the moment Robert got worried?
If you do not know what happened to Barbara Thomas and where exactly, it is impossible to know how long exactly RT and BT were separated before such occured.

A "no comment" statement therefor makes more sense to me. A "we don't know" statement does not indicate suspicion towards Robert, who is considered a victim per WS TOS, but rather stating facts, which they beforehand said they were not willing to share. IMO

I disagree with your assumptions.

If LE was asked:"How far was BT from the RV when she disappeared?", they could have answered by repeating RT's words. " she was about 1/4 of a mile away"

OR they could have simply said we don't know the answer to that question.

The reporter on the video I linked reported that LE said they did not know the answer to those questions. The reporter did not say they had no comment.

 

[katydid23]

Wasn't she last seen by the workers at the dog kennel? Or did someone see her after that?

Reportedly, LE has seen pictures of her on the trail, that day, taken by RT.

 

[10ofRods]

Here's a quote from an article on sniffer dogs:
------------
Reduced olfactory efficiency in sniffer dogs results mainly from overheating, and causes physiological and behavioural resources to be diverted from concentration on the assigned task and applied instead to methods of body cooling. Dogs do not possess sweat glands, and panting is the main means of cooling the body. Since a dog can either sniff or pant, but can never perform both actions simultaneously, panting causes a decrease in sniffing rate.
-----------

 

[LietKynes]

While I agree with much of what you say, the case detective told our VI that the photos showed that RT & BT were there where and when RT said they were. (The VI says he hasn't seen the photos.) As I've argued earlier in this thread, we don't know exactly when or precisely where the photos were taken. But everything else you say is true, so not sure what to make of this, except that the exact timeline may be relevant. JMO

Thanks for correcting.
I wish LE would just release the photos to the public !
It'd show where they were and what she was wearing.

Why the secrecy ??
People could be out there looking for her !

 

[Nerissa]

Something popped into my head - utterly pure speculation - about that pic of BT in the black bikini top & red cap:

It was determined that was an older picture..yes?

I'm wondering if RT may have given LE old pictures & stated they were from that day - ?

How tech savvy would RT be to know that they'd be able to determine the dates...?

Of course I'm assuming they could!! Suppose it depends on various factors, though

Just a thought mulling over - & maybe why that pic has been niggling in the back of my mind

JMO

 

[katydid23]

Thanks for correcting.
I wish LE would just release the photos to the public !
It'd show where they were and what she was wearing.

Why the secrecy ??
People could be out there looking for her !

I agree. I would LOVE to see those last photos taken of her. Where EXACTLY she was on the trail.
What she was wearing, if she was holding a beer mug, wearing boots?
What her face was saying, as in smiling or frowning, etc.
Was she standing on a rock formation or was she walking back on the trail towards the RV?

 

[LietKynes]

Wonder why LE won't release any last photos ?
They released the last video security cam footage of Shannan Watts , and the last footage of Hannah Graham who was killed by the same man who killed Morgan Harrington .

 

[LAhiker]

Thanks for correcting.
I wish LE would just release the photos to the public !
It'd show where they were and what she was wearing.

Why the secrecy ??
People could be out there looking for her !

I don't know, but my guess is that they haven't released the photos because they are either uninformative or embarrassing. Not wanting to get into the whole issue of what BT was wearing, but if she was indeed wearing underwear, or if RT photographed her wearing nothing at all, LE might not think the photos were appropriate or informative to release. Or maybe something else is odd or off about the photos and LE doesn't yet want that to be public?

JMO

 

[10ofRods]

I don't know, but my guess is that they haven't released the photos because they are either uninformative or embarrassing. Not wanting to get into the whole issue of what BT was wearing, but if she was indeed wearing underwear, or if RT photographed her wearing nothing at all, LE might not think the photos were appropriate or informative to release. Or maybe something else is odd or off about the photos and LE doesn't yet want that to be public?

JMO

My guess is that the photos are now part of a criminal investigation.

They could crop the photos (the way they did with the one already released) to show exactly what she was wearing that day and a bit more of the background, so would-be searchers could help out.

However, if they are considering the entire case as a potentially criminal case, and the photos are part of it, they probably won't release them. Also, they won't want people going out there to disturb a potential crime scene (or, perhaps, to encounter the criminal abductors/wrong doers that are obviously lurking).

 

[Cherwell]

R.T will not even tell LE where they may have stopped at that day, starting after they left home.

Is this true, or is it an assumption because details have not been made public?

 

[rosesfromangels]

Is this true, or is it an assumption because details have not been made public?

This is an excellent post.
I resist the impulse of filling in the blanks with info that hasn’t been validated by LE.
Great post!

 

[Stripehaven]

I don't know, but my guess is that they haven't released the photos because they are either uninformative or embarrassing. Not wanting to get into the whole issue of what BT was wearing, but if she was indeed wearing underwear, or if RT photographed her wearing nothing at all, LE might not think the photos were appropriate or informative to release. Or maybe something else is odd or off about the photos and LE doesn't yet want that to be public?

JMO

My guess is that they don’t feel the public can use any info from the photos and in a way it would be sending the public on a wild goose chase to encourage them to be on the lookout for anyone resembling any pictures of BT.

IMO they expect that if anyone finds her, she will not be living and (how can I put this?) it won’t really matter what she was wearing, etc. IMO It will be a situation where she is long past help. A situation where someone is clearly beyond help or easy identification. IMO and I am sorry to being these images here.

 

[LietKynes]

Is this true, or is it an assumption because details have not been made public?

You're right.
Lol, yes--- def. an assumption.

Is it possible RT is no longer talking to LE ?

If he has been -- my utmost apologies to what could be a grief-stricken person who is being fully honest to LE about the whole case; and is maybe not being fully trusted by LE.
So he's clamped up ?
Who knows ?

RT might be upset that LE are asking him questions in what he feels is an open and shut case ; imo.
As in-- why are LE not doing more to find his wife whom he believes someone might've taken as she was wearing a bikini and carrying a beer ?

We seem to be at square one since no information is given out by LE about the veracity of Barbara being at that place and time.

Time is ticking and I'm not suspicious of LE ----- but trusting in the manner in which they've conducted their procedures is frustrating.

She could have been located by now if deceased.
But if RT is right and she was abducted-- where is the ransom demand ?
Eta : corrected

 

[LietKynes]

Something popped into my head - utterly pure speculation - about that pic of BT in the black bikini top & red cap:

It was determined that was an older picture..yes?

I'm wondering if RT may have given LE old pictures & stated they were from that day - ?

How tech savvy would RT be to know that they'd be able to determine the dates...?

Of course I'm assuming they could!! Suppose it depends on various factors, though

Just a thought mulling over - & maybe why that pic has been niggling in the back of my mind

JMO

BBM

Entirely possible.
Not saying that it was taken that day as we really do not know.
But if LE have bothered RT by questioning his account of that day-- they may have annoyed him to the point where he will not answer any more questions and won't give any further interviews.

This has to be so frustrating for Barbara's family.

LE need to release any more pertinent information for this case to move forward.