Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #48

[Seattle1]

So, if CBR doesn't meet the bar for kidnapping, how can he be charged with 1st degree murder in Iowa? Murder that occurs with felony SA, or kidnapping?

None of the above required for 1st-degree murder in Iowa.

The person willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation kills another person is sufficient.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/707.2.pdf

 

[mickey2942]

None of the above required for 1st-degree murder in Iowa.

The person willfully, deliberately, and with premeditation kills another person is sufficient.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/707.2.pdf

But, the prosecution will need to establish that CBR willfully, deliberately, killed Mollie with premeditation. I hope that the prosecution can meet that bar.

Did he actually mean to kill Mollie? Is there evidence to establish this?

 

[TL4S]

But, the prosecution will need to establish that CBR willfully, deliberately, killed Mollie with premeditation. I hope that the prosecution can meet that bar.

Did he actually mean to kill Mollie? Is there evidence to establish this?

IMO, 7-10 stab wounds would be hard to pass off as accidental. Although this defense team might try...

 

[Warwick7]

From CBR's affidavit linked above, he states he parked the car and ran beside Mollie. I don't believe there's any evidence that CBR struck Mollie with his vehicle -- not on the vehicle or the autopsy report.

View attachment 298186

Hard on my memory all my thoughts and ideas. There were so many who had good theories. Several other, like me, had suspicions that he hit her with his car enough to knock her down or injur her.

This is not from 2018 but just lately: "Upon checking the trunk, Rivera said he found Mollie inside, with one side of her head bloodied, according to the affidavit. The suspect allegedly said he pulled Mollie out of the trunk and dragged her by foot into a secluded area in the woods."

Mollie Tibbetts: CRIME SCENE PHOTOS released during first week of farm helper’s murder trial

It has always been in the back of my mind that he eventually hit her with his car. If she had an head abrasion, that could qualify why one side of her head bloodied, blood in the trunk, blood on the rubber trunk seal, and three on a football and fishing pole stored in the trunk.

A head abrasion that bleeds may not be found after decomp has set in.

It was just some thoughts I had.

 

[Warwick7]

I agree. I think, even if his story is truthful and he killed her right after she threatened to call the police, he made that decision, then and there, to harm her instead of turn around and leave. JMO.

So would that mean he stabbed her right then and there 7-12 times?

 

[geevee]

Hard on my memory all my thoughts and ideas. There were so many who had good theories. Several other, like me, had suspicions that he hit her with his car enough to knock her down or injur her.

This is not from 2018 but just lately: "Upon checking the trunk, Rivera said he found Mollie inside, with one side of her head bloodied, according to the affidavit. The suspect allegedly said he pulled Mollie out of the trunk and dragged her by foot into a secluded area in the woods."

Mollie Tibbetts: CRIME SCENE PHOTOS released during first week of farm helper’s murder trial

It has always been in the back of my mind that he eventually hit her with his car. If she had an head abrasion, that could qualify why one side of her head bloodied, blood in the trunk, blood on the rubber trunk seal, and three on a football and fishing pole stored in the trunk.

A head abrasion that bleeds may not be found after decomp has set in.

It was just some thoughts I had.

During opening statements the prosecutor said she had a stab wound in the head, so that's likely where the bleeding came from that he says he saw.

I am curious though, the affidavit states that he saw blood on her head when he opened the trunk and took her out, but the interpreter testified that he saw blood in her neck area. Why the difference?

 

[Seattle1]

dbm - misunderstood question

 

[geevee]

Probably because the neck was visible -- easier to see the blood that flowed to her bare neck than her hair covered skull.

But that isn't what's stated in the affidavit...?

 

[Seattle1]

But that isn't what's stated in the affidavit...?

I'm sorry -- I misunderstood your question. The affidavit clearly states CBR saw blood on the side of her head. I don't know why the interpreter claimed the blood was on her neck versus the side of her head. Perhaps the transcript was misinterpreted as Officer Romero had frequently commented. Does it really matter if the blood was on her neck or head given she was stabbed multiple times with a sharp object? The wounds proved fatal, we know that for sure.

 

[Seattle1]

But, the prosecution will need to establish that CBR willfully, deliberately, killed Mollie with premeditation. I hope that the prosecution can meet that bar.

Did he actually mean to kill Mollie? Is there evidence to establish this?

^^bbm

Often it is the act itself that proves the killing was willful, deliberate, and premeditated. If the killing is carried out in a manner that indicates a strong and calculated desire to bring about the victim’s death, the trier of fact can and often does conclude that the murder was premeditated (State v. Snowden, 2010).

CBR stabbed Mollie multiple times, tossed her in the car trunk, did not render aid or take her to the hospital, dumped her in the cornfield, and disguised her body placing stalks on top of her. He told nobody for more than a month.

I believe his actions satisfy the criteria for murder 1 as defined in Iowa criminal code.

https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publications/iactc/66.2/CH1245.pdf
9.3 First-Degree Murder – Criminal Law

 

[skyedaze]

He is lying. Her shorts and underwear were off. She had at least one running shoe on.....female underwear and running shorts do not just come off when you have bulky running shoe(s) on...even if dragged.

He did something to incapacitate her and get her in that trunk. If she were already dead, why hurry?

He even said he drove up that little driveway (which basically has a built in turnaround)...why? If she were already dead, just dump her in the ditch...but no, he went up into a secluded area of the cornfield at dusk...so no one could see him rip her clothes off, rape and kill her. Who knows maybe he killed her first.

My point is, if she were already dead and he was just getting rid of her, he would not have been driving fast all of a sudden and going up a secluded cornfield cut in at nightfall.

It was about sunset time then..it was dark! Why did he need to be hidden?
We know why.

 

[geevee]

I'm sorry -- I misunderstood your question. The affidavit clearly states CBR saw blood on the side of her head. I don't know why the interpreter claimed the blood was on her neck versus the side of her head. Perhaps the transcript was misinterpreted as Officer Romero had frequently commented. Does it really matter if the blood was on her neck or head given she was stabbed multiple times with a sharp object? The wounds proved fatal, we know that for sure.

No, it doesn't really matter concerning the severity of her wounds, I was just curious about the difference, that's all.

 

[mickey2942]

@Seattle1 I am not disagreeing with you. This is not a disagreement.

It is looking at the ambiguity of the law, as it is written, and based on the evidence currently presented in court, I am not seeing it. Looking forward to more evidence next week to nail this down.

 

[Seattle1]

During opening statements the prosecutor said she had a stab wound in the head, so that's likely where the bleeding came from that he says he saw.

I am curious though, the affidavit states that he saw blood on her head when he opened the trunk and took her out, but the interpreter testified that he saw blood in her neck area. Why the difference?

Prosecutor states Mollie was stabbed in the chest (near ribs), neck, and in the skull. I think it follows for the prosecutor to say the accused admitted he saw blood on her neck and body-- whereas his affidavit states he saw blood on side of her head.

May 19, 2021
Mollie Tibbetts Murder Trial - Prosecution Opening Statement

 

[Warwick7]

He is lying. Her shorts and underwear were off. She had at least one running shoe on.....female underwear and running shorts do not just come off when you have bulky running shoe(s) on...even if dragged.

He did something to incapacitate her and get her in that trunk. If she were already dead, why hurry?

He even said he drove up that little driveway (which basically has a built in turnaround)...why? If she were already dead, just dump her in the ditch...but no, he went up into a secluded area of the cornfield at dusk...so no one could see him rip her clothes off, rape and kill her. Who knows maybe he killed her first.

My point is, if she were already dead and he was just getting rid of her, he would not have been driving fast all of a sudden and going up a secluded cornfield cut in at nightfall.

It was about sunset time then..it was dark! Why did he need to be hidden?
We know why.

Good points.

 

[Warwick7]

When was the affidavit released to the public?

 

[TL4S]

So does this statement mean anything in regards to whether CBR killed MT on 385th, or the cornfield (or somewhere in between)? If he didn't allow her to leave away from him on 385th, does that still count as "abducted," or does that definitevely say she was alive when she ended up in the trunk?

Mollie Tibbetts recap: Officer recalls Cristhian Rivera interrogation
On cross-examination, Riessen told the defense he believed Tibbetts was abducted between 8:20 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. that night.

 

[TL4S]

Same article as above:

"I brought you here, didn't I? So that means I did it, right? I don't remember how I did it," Romero said the defendant told her.

Romero said she remembers “he shrugged his shoulder” and told her “I didn't think about it." Asked if he felt bad, the defendant said "No," she testified.

 

[JDough]

From CBR's affidavit linked above, he states he parked the car and ran beside Mollie. I don't believe there's any evidence that CBR struck Mollie with his vehicle -- not on the vehicle or the autopsy report.

View attachment 298186

Just jumping off your post @Seattle1.

I haven't read the AA in some time. It was a good refresher after listening to testimony the past few days. The prosecution is doing a great job (IMO), providing witnesses that corroborate what exactly happened to sweet Mollie.

I have often wondered if there are cameras near the cornfield. As of now there is no evidence of that, unless I've missed it somehow. I am curious to know if CBR revisited the scene? Did he go back to verify if Mollie was deceased? Did he go back for her phone or Fitbit? Did he find her shorts in his vehicle and wanted to get rid of them?

I realize we don't know the answer to any of these questions. Heck, CBR probably doesn't either if he blacks out every time he is angry or upset. Pretty convenient explanation (cop-out) for why he doesn't remember things. Moo

 

[MsBetsy]

But, the prosecution will need to establish that CBR willfully, deliberately, killed Mollie with premeditation. I hope that the prosecution can meet that bar.

Did he actually mean to kill Mollie? Is there evidence to establish this?

I don't think it will be a problem. He didn't stab her once or twice, realize she might die and attempt to stop the bleeding. He stabbed her over and over again several times.

I think that, along with his stalking behavior, should be enough to prove premeditation. Imo