This case has/had an advantage in that there is an EYEWITNESS.
I'm not so sure it's an advantage considering all the inconsistencies. Perhaps that's what LE is being faced with. The evidence (if any) versus the eye witness claims.
This case has/had an advantage in that there is an EYEWITNESS.
Holly Bobo still missing after nearly six months, no sign of any leads
http://100gf.wordpress.com/2011/10/...after-nearly-six-months-no-sign-of-any-leads/
Terrain difficult to search? The truth?
WHAAT?:banghead:
Don't panic, n/t.
Like you all, I am just a little frustrated. I understand it can be difficult to find your way around the different forums.
What I was saying in regard to searches, is that I can't provide a MSM link for a search if LE does not publicize a search for whatever reason (and there are many different reasons, depending on the case details.)
Does that make any sense?
This link doesn't open for me, n/t. But if you take a look at a topo map of the areas surrounding Holly's home- you will see that it is indeed difficult terrain to fully clear.
wfgodot or anyone else who is following the other cases. Is TBI and local LE just as tight lipped in those cases as they are with Holly's?
I don't get it. We're approaching the 6 month mark and there has been absolutely nothing said by LE. Are they just sitting back waiting for the tipline to ring? :banghead:
If this was released on the day of Holly's abduction, then why the (much later) discussion about introducing the pic of her photo 'without makeup'??
To say I am confused, would be...mild.
What discussion? Could you elaborate, please? TIA
wfgodot or anyone else who is following the other cases. Is TBI and local LE just as tight lipped in those cases as they are with Holly's?
I don't get it. We're approaching the 6 month mark and there has been absolutely nothing said by LE. Are they just sitting back waiting for the tipline to ring? :banghead:
That one works for me, n/t. Not sure why the first didn't- my computer has been having seizures lately, so that's probably why.
And thank you for your kind gesture to help with searches (from so far away! very sweet) but that wasn't what I meant.![]()
I was just trying to explain how certain LE-based searches work. They are often not made public knowledge.
Volunteer-based searches are often made public in MSM.
Volunteers do not have professional accountability.
But SAR professionals, whether they be LE-based, or private groups called in by LE- do have professional accountability.
So for example, if a volunteer is out on a search for a missing person- and finds evidence of the missing person- they might be asked to explain about it- but they will not have to prove their method used in locating the evidence, and they will not be held professionally accountable in their line of work.
But a SAR professional will, especially if on a LE-based search.
In my experience, that's the driving force behind searches that are not reported in MSM. It pretty much all comes down to case integrity.
Does that make sense?
So based on what you just posted, is it your opinion that LE is physically searching for Holly?
Pretty well sums up current public knowledge of the case!It's my opinion that there is a good chance we wouldn't know one way or the other.