Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #46

[MistyWaters]

Having gone through three rapes at different times and by different guys, I can say that I know for a fact that not all guys who stalk, follow and assault females who have seen his face ALWAYS kill them. Even those who do murder the victim don't always know ahead of time that they're going to do it. In his case, he could have dropped her off out in the middle of nowhere without her phone and been long gone before anyone was looking for him especially since he already had at least 2 identities. I don't believe that's what he had planned, but is there any way to prove he hadn't planned to do that? I'm not going to argue the point any more than I have. The chances of having someone on the jury with my way of looking at things is probably slim to none so they should be able to get the conviction even without the proof. Everybody already knows he's guilty, so what's the difference? MOO

IMO the reason he never intended to drop her off in the middle of nowhere is because (according to his story) when he remembered her body was in the trunk and noticed blood on her head, he didn’t drop her off somewhere where she might’ve been found very quickly and received medical intervention. No, instead he dragged and lugged her body and hid it in a cornfield under a pile of corn stalks. Without knowing if she was unconscious but still alive at that point, imo that action also indicates he intended to murder her.

 

[Confusion]

IMO the reason he never intended to drop her off in the middle of nowhere is because (according to his story) when he remembered her body was in the trunk and noticed blood on her head, he didn’t drop her off somewhere where she might’ve been found very quickly and received medical intervention. No, instead he dragged and lugged her body and hid it in a cornfield under a pile of corn stalks. Without knowing if she was unconscious but still alive at that point, imo that action also indicates he intended to murder her.

Show me where I said that he did plan to, and I'll agree that I was wrong. I believe he said that it would be hard to prove that he hadn't originally planned to do that. Like I said, I'm not going to argue any of the points. He's already been tried and convicted here, so I'll just wait to see if the prosecutors in the courtroom are as effective as those here. Let's hope so. MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

Show me where I said that he did plan to, and I'll agree that I was wrong. I believe he said that it would be hard to prove that he hadn't originally planned to do that. Like I said, I'm not going to argue any of the points. He's already been tried and convicted here, so I'll just wait to see if the prosecutors in the courtroom are as effective as those here. Let's hope so. MOO

I think he already convicted himself through this incriminating statement to LE. Had he not admitted to anything, claimed to have no involvement, not led LE to her body it would be a very different case.

Therefore I may be overly optomistic but I’m still hopeful he’ll relieve Mollie’s family from the pain of having to sit through a trial by pleading guilty after his defence team receives all the evidence, even if he’s only able to negotiate minor concessions such as location of his incarceration.

 

[Mica]

I think a lot of jurors are going to think that if someone grabs a random girl off the street, throws her in their trunk, at knife point, that right there is very very close to premeditated murder. How many predators who do that, plan to set that girl free and unharmed?

I agree.

In addition, the prosecution admitted they haven’t disclosed all their evidence in accordance with the timeframe of the law. They know what they have and believe it must be enough for the charge they imposed. Additional forensic testing is expected to be done in November. They are continuing to establish a strong case and put all their ducks in a row, IMO.

 

[SharonNeedles]

Show me where I said that he did plan to, and I'll agree that I was wrong. I believe he said that it would be hard to prove that he hadn't originally planned to do that. Like I said, I'm not going to argue any of the points. He's already been tried and convicted here, so I'll just wait to see if the prosecutors in the courtroom are as effective as those here. Let's hope so. MOO

I’m not sure it’s accurate to say he’s been tried and convicted here, nor do I think the “prosecutors” in this thread have swayed the votes. Many arguing for First Degree were doing so long before Mollie’s fate was even known. What are the chances that you could poll twelve people here and get all of them to say they think he’s guilty of First Degree Murder beyond reasonable doubt?

 

[Alethea]

I agree.

In addition, the prosecution admitted they haven’t disclosed all their evidence in accordance with the timeframe of the law. They know what they have and believe it must be enough for the charge they imposed. Additional forensic testing is expected to be done in November. They are continuing to establish a strong case and put all their ducks in a row, IMO.

I agree with you but I want to clarify the prosecution has not disclosed any evidence. There has been no discovery released to the public at all yet. The only thing we are going on is the probable cause affidavit where a judge agreed the facts as it stands, based on the surveillance video and CR's confession, establishes probable cause for the charge of first degree murder.

I think many people are judging the known facts through the lens of personally or professionally following hundreds if not more previous cases of violent crime. CR is not the first person ever accused of first degree murder so we are not limited to ignoring every other case that has been investigated and tried when we compare the facts and law.

 

[Alethea]

I’m not sure it’s accurate to say he’s been tried and convicted here, nor do I think the “prosecutors” in this thread have swayed the votes. Many arguing for First Degree were doing so long before Mollie’s fate was even known. What are the chances that you could poll twelve people here and get all of them to say they think he’s guilty of First Degree Murder beyond reasonable doubt?

Well, a judge found probable cause to allow charges of first degree murder to move forward so this wasn't exactly pulled out of thin air by the members of Websleuths. The evidence was strong enough that the prosecutor did not even need to go to a grand jury.

There has been no evidence released outside of the PC affidavit so I don't think anyone would agree that the state has met its burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at this point.

 

[SharonNeedles]

Well, a judge found probable cause to allow charges of first degree murder to move forward so this wasn't exactly pulled out of thin air by the members of Websleuths. The evidence was strong enough that the prosecutor did not even need to go to a grand jury.

There has been no evidence released outside of the PC affidavit so I don't think anyone would agree that the state has met its burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at this point.

To state murder charges ever go to a grand jury in Iowa?

 

[katydid23]

To state murder charges ever go to a grand jury in Iowa?

I just did a quick google and found several Grand Jury indictments for murder in 2014 through 2017.

 

[Confusion]

Well, a judge found probable cause to allow charges of first degree murder to move forward so this wasn't exactly pulled out of thin air by the members of Websleuths. The evidence was strong enough that the prosecutor did not even need to go to a grand jury.

There has been no evidence released outside of the PC affidavit so I don't think anyone would agree that the state has met its burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt at this point.

I know I had decided to just drop it, but I thought it was worth mentioning that Felony Murder is also first degree murder.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I’m not sure it’s accurate to say he’s been tried and convicted here, nor do I think the “prosecutors” in this thread have swayed the votes. Many arguing for First Degree were doing so long before Mollie’s fate was even known. What are the chances that you could poll twelve people here and get all of them to say they think he’s guilty of First Degree Murder beyond reasonable doubt?

BBM
Beyond REASONABLE doubt is the key here IMO. A real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence.

CR is shown on security footage, admitted he was in contact/confrontation with Mollie, which resulted in her being bloody and in the trunk of his car, and led LE to her remains. I don't think it's going to be a stretch for the Prosecution to connect the dots beyond a reasonable doubt.

SharonNeedles can you give me an idea on why/how you think it might be difficult? I am sincerely interested in hearing other opinions

 

[SharonNeedles]

BBM
Beyond REASONABLE doubt is the key here IMO. A real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or lack of evidence.

CR is shown on security footage, admitted he was in contact/confrontation with Mollie, which resulted in her being bloody and in the trunk of his car, and led LE to her remains. I don't think it's going to be a stretch for the Prosecution to connect the dots beyond a reasonable doubt.

SharonNeedles can you give me an idea on why/how you think it might be difficult? I am sincerely interested in hearing other opinions

Simply put, I see what looks to be by definition second degree murder. No more, no less.

 

[girlhasnoname]

Simply put, I see what looks to be by definition second degree murder. No more, no less.

Okay, I see now that we're talking degrees.....whew....I was wondering if I had missed something LOL.

 

[katydid23]

Simply put, I see what looks to be by definition second degree murder. No more, no less.

OK. So when he saw her on the road, a stranger jogging, and he stopped his vehicle and approached her, what was his plan?

 

[girlhasnoname]

Sorry for the long post, but what does anyone think the odds are CR stated he "blocked" his memory in advance of a possible defense??? He did have approx. a month to plan just in case……..

Generally, the defense to second-degree murder depends on the specific facts of the case. However, two possible defenses in Iowa are insanity or defense of self or another person.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2015/701.4.pdf​

Iowa's legal definition of insanity:

701.4 Insanity. A person shall not be convicted of a crime if at the time the crime is committed the person suffers from such a diseased or deranged condition of the mind as to render the person incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act the person is committing or incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong in relation to that act. Insanity need not exist for any specific length of time before or after the commission of the alleged criminal act. If the defense of insanity is raised, the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant at the time of the crime suffered from such a deranged condition of the mind as to render the defendant incapable of knowing the nature and quality of the act the defendant was committing or was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong in relation to the act. [C79, 81, §701.4] 84 Acts, ch 1320, §1[

 

[MistyWaters]

I think this discussion is very interesting.... based only on information at the time of arrest, we as members of a WS jury, what might be the appropriate charge ...?

So could we switch around our speculative opinions? If we were a WS juror ready to vote first degree premeditated, what key difference would swing our vote to 2nd degree. And vice versa, from 2nd degree to 1st?

My thought - I’d vote 2nd if this were a crime of passion, broken relationship, same type scenario only C was stalking her because she wouldn’t return his phone calls, went running after her, begging, pleading, apologizing, hopeful of reconciling their relationship.

That’s not to say a defendant deserves a lesser sentence because the victim had the misfortune of knowing him. However when there’s a prior relationship, I think the accused has greater reason to be reasonably optimistic the approach will be successful and as a result, that diminishes premeditation and intending to murder. So I’d have to blank out that C admitted to chasing after and tackling a virtual stranger who demanded to be left alone and who threatened to call police.

 

[Confusion]

I think this discussion is very interesting.... based only on information at the time of arrest, we as members of a WS jury, what might be the appropriate charge ...?

So could we switch around our speculative opinions? If we were a WS juror ready to vote first degree premeditated, what key difference would swing our vote to 2nd degree. And vice versa, from 2nd degree to 1st?

My thought - I’d vote 2nd if this were a crime of passion, broken relationship, same type scenario only C was stalking her because she wouldn’t return his phone calls, went running after her, begging, pleading, apologizing, hopeful of reconciling their relationship.

That’s not to say a defendant deserves a lesser sentence because the victim had the misfortune of knowing him. However when there’s a prior relationship, I think the accused has greater reason to be reasonably optimistic the approach will be successful and as a result, that diminishes premeditation and intending to murder. So I’d have to blank out that C admitted to chasing after and tackling a virtual stranger who demanded to be left alone and who threatened to call police.

I believe it was 1st degree, but I've seen no evidence that it was premeditated. I do believe that he was probably in the process of committing a felony when he killed her, but they haven't really shown proof of that. Because we haven't been shown any evidence that he tried to abduct her before killing her and nothing has been said about a sexual assault, I'd have to go with 2nd degree at this time. Any evidence there is (and I don't doubt there probably is some) that shows that he pre-planned it, had to return to his car for the weapon, sexually assaulted her and/or abducted her would change my mind. I just don't think that evidence will be shared before a trial. MOO

 

[MistyWaters]

I believe it was 1st degree, but I've seen no evidence that it was premeditated. I do believe that he was probably in the process of committing a felony when he killed her, but they haven't really shown proof of that. Because we haven't been shown any evidence that he tried to abduct her before killing her and nothing has been said about a sexual assault, I'd have to go with 2nd degree at this time. Any evidence there is (and I don't doubt there probably is some) that shows that he pre-planned it, had to return to his car for the weapon, sexually assaulted her and/or abducted her would change my mind. I just don't think that evidence will be shared before a trial. MOO

Just one question, hope you don’t mind me asking.... For you, it would lean more towards premeditation if he had to go back to his vehicle to get the weapon, and less if he was already armed? If so, I’m just curious about the difference you think that’d make. Is it because then it appears he took time to contemplate?

 

[girlhasnoname]

I believe it was 1st degree, but I've seen no evidence that it was premeditated. I do believe that he was probably in the process of committing a felony when he killed her, but they haven't really shown proof of that. Because we haven't been shown any evidence that he tried to abduct her before killing her and nothing has been said about a sexual assault, I'd have to go with 2nd degree at this time. Any evidence there is (and I don't doubt there probably is some) that shows that he pre-planned it, had to return to his car for the weapon, sexually assaulted her and/or abducted her would change my mind. I just don't think that evidence will be shared before a trial. MOO

ITA factually with you at this time. I expect things to change once LE provides discovery to the DT. I can't remember if there was any gag order granted???

ETA: Prosecution to provide discovery not, LE.

 

[girlhasnoname]

I think this discussion is very interesting.... based only on information at the time of arrest, we as members of a WS jury, what might be the appropriate charge ...?

So could we switch around our speculative opinions? If we were a WS juror ready to vote first degree premeditated, what key difference would swing our vote to 2nd degree. And vice versa, from 2nd degree to 1st?

My thought - I’d vote 2nd if this were a crime of passion, broken relationship, same type scenario only C was stalking her because she wouldn’t return his phone calls, went running after her, begging, pleading, apologizing, hopeful of reconciling their relationship.

That’s not to say a defendant deserves a lesser sentence because the victim had the misfortune of knowing him. However when there’s a prior relationship, I think the accused has greater reason to be reasonably optimistic the approach will be successful and as a result, that diminishes premeditation and intending to murder. So I’d have to blank out that C admitted to chasing after and tackling a virtual stranger who demanded to be left alone and who threatened to call police.

I don't think there will be one piece of evidence that could convince me it isn't 1st degree murder when ALL of the facts of the case are in.