CA CA - Barbara Thomas, 69, from Bullhead City AZ, disappeared in Mojave desert, 12 July 2019 #9

[HongKongPhooey]

I have no idea if my neighbors would do anything or not if I went missing.

Damn looks like its down to us to find you then

 

[NervousNellie]

@10ofRods - you are right. I was being very narrow minded in suggesting all their friends are in the same age group. As a matter of fact, one of my closest friends is 20 years younger than I am. Also, we have heard that one of Barbara’s best friends was her stepdaughter. So, yes, my statement (quoted below for clarification) about the age group of their friends was not well considered.

Thanks for sharing all that is going on behind the scenes; it’s encouraging.

Because we haven’t heard from their friends does not mean they are silent. Robert and Barbara’s friends would be in their 70’s, I assume, and are not likely to be media or social media savvy, IMO. At least based on their (RT/BT) lack of social media presence, IMO. How would we “hear” them? Has media been knocking on doors to publicize friends’ thoughts?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Damn looks like its down to us to find you then

Nobody here knows who I'm am.

 

[10ofRods]

Things I tried this week:

Searching Mojave County AZ public documents for any search warrants served in the last 2 months (nothing came up, but oddly, almost no warrants at all, so maybe system isn’t perfect?)

No results on the SBC Superior Court system either. But while trying to do that, I thought of a lot of questions about search warrants.

Doesn’t there have to be an open criminal case for a search warrant? I know that police can’t simply search my house if they think my neighbor is involved in something and they can only search my house if they think I am involved with something.

So doesn’t a POI have to be named in order for the warrant to go out? Searching by the LE case number got me nothing. Even if RT is not a POI, wouldn’t there have to be a connection between RT and some actual POI for a warrant to be issued? (So, if LE thought Barbara was abducted by, say, a business associate of RT’s, wouldn’t they have to specifically tell the court that fact if they wanted to search RT’s RV or house?)

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Things I tried this week:

Searching Mojave County AZ public documents for any search warrants served in the last 2 months (nothing came up, but oddly, almost no warrants at all, so maybe system isn’t perfect?)

No results on the SBC Superior Court system either. But while trying to do that, I thought of a lot of questions about search warrants.

Doesn’t there have to be an open criminal case for a search warrant? I know that police can’t simply search my house if they think my neighbor is involved in something and they can only search my house if they think I am involved with something.

So doesn’t a POI have to be named in order for the warrant to go out? Searching by the LE case number got me nothing. Even if RT is not a POI, wouldn’t there have to be a connection between RT and some actual POI for a warrant to be issued? (So, if LE thought Barbara was abducted by, say, a business associate of RT’s, wouldn’t they have to specifically tell the court that fact if they wanted to search RT’s RV or house?)

Search Warrants and Probable Cause
A judge will issue a warrant if the police can show that it's reasonably likely that the search will turn up contraband or evidence of a crime.

The police will have to show to the judge issuing a search warrant that it's likely that evidence of a crime will be found during a search. No fishing expeditions allowed. JMO.

Search Warrants and Probable Cause

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I found an interesting article about cell phone location data and search warrants.

The Supreme Court declined to extend Miller and Smith to CSLI collection, and concluded that that because of the unique nature of cell phone location information, the third-party doctrine did not apply. The Court determined that the Government’s acquisition of Carpenter’s CSLI was a Fourth Amendment search. The Court correspondingly held that the Government must generally obtain a warrant supported by probable cause before acquiring CSLI records.

PEACE OFFICERS MUST GENERALLY OBTAIN A WARRANT SUPPORTED BY PROBABLE CAUSE BEFORE OBTAINING HISTORICAL CELL-SITE LOCATION INFORMATION

 

[rosesfromangels]

There can be many reasons for this, but RT’s one main relationship seems to be Barbara.

Respectfully snipped for commentary focus and reply.
I have been dwelling on this dynamic; of RT and BT seemingly being insulated from others. Even the location of their home speaks to this dynamic. However, I don't know the bigger picture. For all I know, they were very social. I will also point out, that while not always the case, there is a certain dynamic that I have often observed in couples of a certain age category, such as RT and BT. It often seems that the woman takes more of a "help mate" role in the relationship, with the husband calling the shots. There seems to be the unspoken requirement that the man will be the prime focus, and "doted" on. From characterizations, this seems to fit the RT and BT profile. Of course, I know little of them, just generalizing.

Amateur opinion and speculation

 

[ChuckMaureen]

sbm bbm

If LE does not suspect foul play, or they have no evidence that a crime has been committed, there probably is no need to tell the public those details.
According to the VI the police have seen pictures of Barbara there that day, which would verify Robert's story.

While they we were searching they stated they conducted the search based on where Robert last saw her. They have never given any indication that they don't believe she was there or that her husband is a suspect in her disappearance.

<snipped for clarity>

Imo

It might verify only the "she was there" part of the story, none of the rest of it.

LE did give this indication: "no evidence of <BT> was found during the search". That, of course, does not mean LE does not believe BT was there but it might open the question does LE believe the part of the story where RT described the 'where'.

And, this from LE: (Cops dismiss husband's claim that his bikini-clad wife who went missing during their hike was abducted)

"But our investigation does not indicate any signs that she was abducted."

Now, if LE believes BT was there but they do not believe BT was abducted, what's left? Why won't they say?

If we go with that (there but not abducted), BT must either still be in the desert or BT left the area of her own free will with assistance from a somebody.

If BT is still in the desert how far could BT have wandered from the 'last seen' location? No evidence of BT was found during the search.

The alternative: BT left the scene with assistance, is that even remotely likely? Why put family through the ringer?

Finally: either LE is wrong or RT's story is not on the level. That is why there are no updates; it's a stalemate. IOW, the case temperature has dropped significantly.

A perfect crime?

 

[kay74]

sbm bbm


It might verify only the "she was there" part of the story, none of the rest of it.

LE did give this indication: "no evidence of <BT> was found during the search". That, of course, does not mean LE does not believe BT was there but it might open the question does LE believe the part of the story where RT described the 'where'.

And, this from LE: (Cops dismiss husband's claim that his bikini-clad wife who went missing during their hike was abducted)


Now, if LE believes BT was there but they do not believe BT was abducted, what's left? Why won't they say?

If we go with that (there but not abducted), BT must either still be in the desert or BT left the area of her own free will with assistance from a somebody.

If BT is still in the desert how far could BT have wandered from the 'last seen' location? No evidence of BT was found during the search.

The alternative: BT left the scene with assistance, is that even remotely likely? Why put family through the ringer?

Finally: either LE is wrong or RT's story is not on the level. That is why there are no updates; it's a stalemate. IOW, the case temperature has dropped significantly.

A perfect crime?

IMO. she is out there. Trying to find her is like trying to find a needle in a haystack, all that tall brush all those hills and everything looks the same. They could have walked right by her.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

IMO. she is out there. Trying to find her is like trying to find a needle in a haystack, all that tall brush all those hills and everything looks the same. They could have walked right by her.

It is possible. But nine days of searching is nothing to sneeze at. Even though not perfect, professionals conducted the searches. Professionals who are familiar with the environment and the hazards which it presents. Aerial, ground level and canine searches. It isn't likely for dogs to miss her if she were within the search boundaries and no other elements interfered with the doggie's olfactory sense. That might indicate BT is beyond the search area perimeter but I doubt that is the case.

If LE truly believed BT was in the broader area (wandered/got lost beyond the original search boundaries) then why haven't they conducted additional searches beyond the original (assuming LE hasn't since we haven't seen reports indicating that).

LE has a theory. Maybe not a complete theory but... they have a theory, and RT has clammed up/avoided the public arena.

AFAIK, both sides have played their initial moves in this case and now, they're at stalemate.

 

[CSIDreamer]

Just because they called off the official search wouldn't necessarily mean they aren't randomly driving that route looking for carrion birds does it? Sorry, there's no tactful way to ask that.

BTW, if I ever go missing I'd be honored to have y'all helping to find me.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

bbm

Just because they called off the official search wouldn't necessarily mean they aren't randomly driving that route looking for carrion birds does it? Sorry, there's no tactful way to ask that.

BTW, if I ever go missing I'd be honored to have y'all helping to find me.

Not this many weeks afterward. If BT was there, most likely there isn't much left.

 

[10ofRods]

Nixle mentions that park rangers were also involved early on. I’d think that they would drive that area frequently (more than once per day), especially in light of Barbara’s disappearance (looking for carrion birds and any other clues). Apparently there’s been a die-back in carrion birds out there, though. Sorry to be gross, but surely the various search organizations have been looking for just such a clue.

I agree it’s too late for carrion birds. That first evening, there could have been other scavengers at work. But surely there would have been signs? (Her sunglasses? Her hat?)

Does LE think she’s really far from Kelbaker road? (But doesn’t have sufficient digital info to suggest a search elsewhere?)

Sounds that way to me. And I agree that the temperature of the case is cooling.

If there’s a picture of Barbara near Kelbaker/HH then it’s timestamps becomes absolutely crucial to any case that includes foul play. That picture, which the VI states exists and he has been assured by LE that it exists, is the key piece of evidence as to where she was at whatever time (later than 9 am) that it was taken.

That’s why I’m wondering how much LE needs in order to move on to some new step. As far as we know, there’s no subpoena for digital records. Did RT get his phone back? Is LE relying on tips to the tip line and the same SM that led to the convenience store? Do they not have his GPS records? Wouldn’t the GPS from the truck need a subpoena?

It’s also possible that RT fully cooperated. In fact, that’s my default assumption. While he didn’t ask them to sit and have tea in his RV that first day, he apparently surrendered his phone. Maybe he gave permission for them to have the truck GPS. We don’t know.

Stalemate is a great word for this and that makes me very sad.

 

[Cherwell]

The lack of family support..
We know what the son thinks..
There must be 2 step daughters ,,,
The media mentions Tracy giving her opinion agreeing with RT about the abduction theory..
But there is another one claiming that BT is her children's Grandmother..
and we know what our VI thinks..
But there does not appear to be any friends supporting RT or looking for BT

If a woman is saying that Barbara is her children's grandmother, then she is likely to be the ex-wife of Barbara's son. In other words, Barbara's former daughter-in-law.

 

[cazador]

If a woman is saying that Barbara is her children's grandmother, then she is likely to be the ex-wife of Barbara's son. In other words, Barbara's former daughter-in-law.

Awesome .. Thank You

 

[NervousNellie]

If a woman is saying that Barbara is her children's grandmother, then she is likely to be the ex-wife of Barbara's son. In other words, Barbara's former daughter-in-law.

Well, or she could be Barbara’s former daughter-in-law’s spouse.

 

[Elle*Bee]

Damn looks like its down to us to find you then

Nobody here knows who I'm am.

I’ve left explicit instructions with trusted loved ones that if I ever go missing, they are to come here and ask for Websleuthers’ help.

 

[LietKynes]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

This just feels so ... 'off'.
I shared this case with a friend who lives in AZ, and some other people who follow missing persons' cases.
Most of their thoughts about this case mirror posts made here.

One action that could be taken even now is for RT to take LE and the media and show them exactly where he was standing to take the photos.
Then have someone with a large truck or rv to park where they'd parked that day.
Then show where he was standing at the moment she took a 'turn around the corner'.
And he could walk to the spot where he last saw her with his eyes.

Why not ? What could it hurt ?

The events from a tragic day stand out so clearly in ones' mind.
Imo.

How can one forget where you'd driven or where you might have had your lunch at --if you'd stopped to eat ?

RT could just walk LE through his day.

I still remember exactly what I was doing when my close friend called to tell me her younger brother and SIL had been murdered. Most of that day from the phone call on is still so clear.
She sounded in shock and I could barely tell it was her , since her voice was distorted.

You can't tell me he forgot where she turned around the corner and that he's forgotten where else they drove that day.

Even if their marriage had hit an impasse.... the loss of someone is still a major change in his life.
The events of that day should stand out to him.

Where is Barbara ?
If she's in that desert but many miles away from where the fifth wheel was parked , then why doesn't RT explain to LE all of the other areas they'd stopped at ?
Because by now she should've been found.

And fwiw, I don't think she was ever kidnapped.

If she's found beyond the distance she could've reasonably walked without proper protective clothing and only a can of beer ... Someone has some 'splainin' to do.
Let's say her body is found 50 -100 miles from where the fifth wheel was parked.
Then wouldn't LE want to know why RT didn't tell them they'd stopped elswhere to hike or take photos ?
I would.
Even if it's a nosy question.
MOO

 

[MassGuy]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

I could ignore all the weirdness here and would be open to her getting lost, had some of the circumstances been a bit different.

If they were actually on a hike instead of a walk, were not in an area adjacent to a road, and had she not been traveling such a short distance back to their RV, I’d be confident she’s out there.

The search should have turned up something.

That wasn’t the case though, and that alone makes foul play a strong possibility.

With everything else on top of this, I’m sold that it’s foul play.

I’m not saying that there’s no chance in hell there’s an innocent explanation for this, but there’s no chance in hell there’s an innocent explanation for this.

If you know what I mean.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Yeah, I could ignore all the weirdness here and would be open to her getting lost, had some of the circumstances been a bit different.

If they were actually on a hike instead of a walk, were not in an area adjacent to a road, and had she not been traveling such a short distance back to their RV, I’d be confident she’s out there.

The search should have turned up something.

That wasn’t the case though, and that alone makes foul play a strong possibility.

With everything else on top of this, I’m sold that it’s foul play.

I’m not saying that there’s no chance in hell there’s an innocent explanation for this, but there’s no chance in hell there’s an innocent explanation for this.

If you know what I mean.

I still think that there are more than one possible reason for BT's disappearance.

She could have become dehydrated leading to disorientation which caused her to walk away from the RV instead of towards it. She could still be out there somewhere.

Another possible scenario is she only diverged enough to miss the RV but found the road where she was picked up by unknown persons never to be found in the area where she was last seen.

<modsnip> JMO