GUILTY IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 #16

[ACG2x]

That's what Sherri Papini says.
Sorry, couldn't help myself.

So MT was taken by two masked Hispanic women and branded on her shoulder and had her hair cut off? My God it's happening all over!

 

[oviedo]

Although I have been leaning more toward she disappeared while jogging, it does sound like he believes someone was in the house because he gives us the reason why they were not there. Confusing, because he could actually mean nobody went into the house and took her…

I kind of read the quote as if their intent was not to originally take her - but they ended up doing just that if she was taken from the house. I may go back and look at the LE timeline of what they actually have confirmed about her last known whereabouts.

 

[Bravo]

The eye wear doesn't mean a ton to me. We don't know what kind of contacts Mollie had or how many pairs. Back in the day before I had Lasix done I wore contacts and sometimes glasses. I was down to half my eye sight before my teens. I could and did get around town on foot to places I knew without any eye wear. I could see if a car was coming, streetlights changing etc. etc. We just don't know what Mollie typically did. Running in the heat with glasses doesn't seem practical. Yet contacts can be a pain if they dry out or wind is blowing in your face while running.

 

[Jealoushe]

ABSOLUTELY!!!!!! I am medically diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder and on a recent trip to the Bahamas when I got back to the states and was exiting the ship, I was pulled aside and searched and questioned. I am a younger white female and although I stand out because I have multiple tattoos, I don't necessarily look "suspicious." I was TERRIFIED. I knew I did nothing wrong and had nothing on me that would get me in trouble but just the fact that they THOUGHT I did sent me into a frenzy. I couldn't stand still and I probably looked guilty as all hell! Does everyone truly believe WC has the mental capacity to pull something like this off with no trace of evidence left behind? I just find it highly unlikely. I would say I'm fairly intelligent and highly into true crime and I KNOW I couldn't pull it off. But I think he knows SOMETHING.

It is impossible to know without knowing him, but he absolutely could be. No one thought Robert Pikton was intelligent either...

 

[buggiegirl]

Years back I knew a polygraph examiner. He did it for a living! He told me to never take a polygraph test! If my kid were missing tho, I absolutely would......get me off the table and let's get down to business!

The problem is that you can be totally innocent and not pass a polygraph because the science is not accurate and fool proof. So it would end up wasting time focusing on you instead of using traditional methods to exclude you and move on.

 

[cluciano63]

LE missed the boat, Imo, by not asking the public for specific, basic info...who missed work/was late, changed hairstyle or appearance, cleaned vehicle, etc...all basic stuff that people won’t recall accurately for long. Those things should have been mentioned right away. Many of us think they are obvious but most people do not follow crimes obsessively...jmo

 

[gitana1]

I've said this before but not only am I an attorney, but my colleagues jokingly call me the firm girl scout since I am a stickler for best practices and legal ethics, and I would never take a polygraph. I have generalized anxiety disorder and I am sure I would fail no matter what the questions were. I have seen conference videos of me when someone caught me off guard and asked me questions about my very specialized area of practice and I looked so nervous and twitchy you would have thought I was a bum off the street instead of an expert in the field. Pop psychology and TV body language experts start with an expectation of complete neurotypicality. What they say makes for good drama but it's completely meaningless if you have a person with an underlying anxiety, mood, or sensory disorder.

Ha ha! I can relate. I'm the type of person if someone makes an allegation in a room about someone doing something, and I know it wasn't me, I immediately turn red and look guilty!

But what if it was a loved one who was missing or dead? I also have anxiety disorder and have reacted the same way as you to a sudden camera. But I would do it in a heartbeat if it was someone I loved who went missing or turned up dead.

The key also is how do non-lawyers tend to respond when asked to do one? Why would someone who knows he shouldn't take a polygraph also talk to LE?

Polygraphs are psychological. They aren't science but they can be very effective. Because they're used in the context of an interview/interrogation. It's actually part of it. So instead of saying, "I believe you're lying. I believe you know exactly what happened to Tiffany. I think you hurt her." They may say, "Did you have anything to do with the death of Tiffany? Did you harm her in any way? Did you kil her?" "Sir take a look at this chart. What this shows me right here - and this is the machine, not me- you're being deceptive. So you need to tell us what you know."

The only difference between agreeing to be interviewed by LE and a polygraph is the results of the polygraph aren't admissible but what you say to LE is.

I am very interested when close family or loved ones refuse. I do not believe that ANY innocent loved ones would refuse a polygraph if their person is missing unless they're sociopaths.

But other people? Refusal to take one may or may not indicate anything. How sophisticated is the person? Do they have experience with the criminal justice system or the law? Are they also refusing to talk at all?

If WC is actually talking to LE, but refusing a polygraph? That's a possible red flag to me.

Otherwise, not really.

 

[Bravo]

So MT was taken by two masked Hispanic women and branded on her shoulder and had her hair cut off? My God it's happening all over!

ROFLMAO sowwy mods

 

[Wndrlst]

I totally botched my previous post. My apologies. In an attempt to clean it up:

Why does the public need to know right now?


If they are trying to make a perp feel comfortable and that they aren't looking to charge him or her with anything, then they may not say "foul play". That is a loaded term psychologically speaking. I've seen several "interrogations" where they convince the perp that they're on their side, that things can happen "accidentally", that they know the person didn't mean to do anything wrong, etc. Using the words "foul play" can ruin that flow.

In a way this reminds me of the first and second question Border Control asks you if you have ever left the country and drive back in. I lived in San Diego for a few years and my friends and I would travel down to Baja for a fun night. Sometimes we drove. Every single time we drove back into the U.S., the first question was, "What country are you a citizen of?" Seems like a totally random question to ask. Next question was the serious one, "What were you doing there and how long were you?". I asked a BP Officer about it once, he told me it throws people off. Easier to spot the ones lying when you come back with the second question. The determining question.

I'm sure there's a reason and method as to the 5-10 minutes, etc.

I have thought this out too! I believe Dad's comments were part of LE's "leak" of information and to make it seem that they don't think the perp did anything wrong. Make them feel at ease so that if MT is still out there alive that he or she can let her go and they don't think that they meant "any harm" by all of the happenings. It's always been interesting to me how Dad's face just screams concern during PC's and the look of intent as he stares into the crowd looking for a specific individual. Now I'm a single 30 YO and I talk to my Mom and Dad several times a week on the phone but NEVER for 3 hours and if it is a long call, it's to complain about something BAD that's happened or something that I'm worried about. I think Dad's intel exceeds that of the rest of the family because of their close relationship and because of something that was said on that 3 hour call.

 

[wary]

JMO, he's using the LE interrogation tactic where they tell a suspect "hey, this was probably an accident, right? You didn't mean to kill her but things got out of hand", etc. Her father is saying "hey, you probably went to the house just to talk to her. You didn't intend to hurt her." It works well with some suspects who believe they never intended to harm their victim.

I agree--it's a classic technique. Now...is he using it on his own, or has LE discussed it with him, I wonder...

 

[Deleted member 718]

If someone had been in the house LE would know. I do not think anyone was in the house and I'm with her mother.....Mollie didn't make it back from her jog. Now, it could be that someone who had a different idea of their relationship came across her jogging and she accepted a ride.
The dogs being in the basement imo tells us she wasn't home when she went missing.

Agree about the dogs being in the basement. But imo if someone came to pick her up at home, she could have put the dogs in the basement as she left.

 

[KaaBoom]

....

 

[Twistinginthewind]

Although I have been leaning more toward she disappeared while jogging, it does sound like he believes someone was in the house because he gives us the reason why they were not there. Confusing, because he could actually mean nobody went into the house and took her…

I agree. I took Mollie's dad's statement as not excluding the possibility that someone went into the house/interacted with her there, just that if they did, it started out with them not intending to do her harm, and then things escalated and that changed, e.g., they were 'hitting on her', she didn't respond as expected / rejected them, they got upset / angry, and said "you're coming with me, now" kind of scenario.

 

[tlneedham]

I don’t know. Everybody has those disposable contacts these days. Even if she had a current pair in a plastic container with solution in it, she could have pulled out a fresh pair without throwing out the old ones. Or she could have that kind where you wear them for a week 24/7 and then have all her subsequent pairs. The fact she had contacts in the house does not mean she wasn’t actually wearing a pair.

Well this should be easy for LE to prove or disprove. If she opened new contacts instead of putting the old ones in, the wrappers they came in would be in the trash.

And if she had two sets she was using—kind of odd, but not impossible—the empty lens case for the ones she put in would be near the others.

BF should have some idea of what her habit was and where she kept her contact stuff at his house.

 

[SharonNeedles]

It was a response to a statement that 80% of people in Brooklyn Iowa own guns. Which is highly unlikely. Since no place in the US has gun ownership that high.

It’s unlikely, but to say 80% of households in Brooklyn have guns might not be that far off... still, I don’t think that’s got any relevance.

 

[YiYa]

Was it a burglary, or vandalism. I thought it was just vandalism.

The True Value was vandalized on the night of the 17th. There was a burglary reported on the called logs on the evening of the 16th that was right down the street from the BF's house. This came from reading the LE call logs. It was not in MSM.

 

[YiYa]

This ones interesting. Is it possible that the FBI RECOGNIZED certain aspects of the case as being connected to another case or several unresolved cases??

I wonder this too.

 

[Goe]

Just questions I have
1. If she was dogsitting, why didnt she take the dogs with her for a jog specially at that time? (Is it dark outside by 7:30 in Iowa?

2. Apparently she made it back home, lets say she was taken from the house, why didnt the dogs bark? Maybe the dogs are familiar with the person who took her?

I read on an article the dogs were found in a cage in the basement (meaning she put them there before heading out to work) but she didbt have a car so could someone she knew offered her a ride?? And why didnt she amswer her brother text first when she woke up? So was she abducted from inside or outside the house?

<modsnipped>

 

[Nah]

There have been so many cases where LE has a POI and they do light questioning on and off for a few weeks. Suddenly one morning you wake up to the headlines that that POI was just arrested for rape and murder. I won’t be surprised if that happens in this case. Sometimes I think LE just has to skirt around the edges with their theories until they can finally find a piece of concrete evidence that supports their theory. IMO if it isn’t WC it’s going to end up a cold case/serial killer type thing.

 

[Cortne]

This guy has more stalks than a cornfield in August. However, I don't think he is involved in Mollie's disappearance.

This guy doesn’t remind me of somebody that learns from his mistakes.

Jmo