TN - Holly Bobo, 20, Darden; believed abducted 13 April 2011 - #33

[cluciano63]

If we are all still alive a decade or two from now...I fear this case will be just as mystifying and may gain fame only by being one of the weirdest missing persons cases ever...

 

[~n/t~]

IMO, EVERYONE should watch the video that Chili posted. It has some interesting visuals of the property and the how narrow those local roads are. The date of the video is April 17 (4 days after the kidnapping) and in the interview, Pat Brown summed it up quite well by saying the evidence doesn't match the story. It never has.

Considering it allegedly took LE 10 minutes to get to the property would they have passed a vehicle if Holly was taken by vehicle? Would it be one road leading to their property?

I've never heard of a case where the story was "amended" or "revised".....and that was the first time. It has been amended or revised at least 2 or 3 times since that video.

This is the most bizarre case ever, imo.

 

[~n/t~]

Yes.
I have always found that interesting, considering the usage of text messaging these days. Especially in environments where folks are often requested to turn off their phones or turn to vibrate, etc.. such as schools, during exams, libraries, public places, while driving- that sort of thing. Especially considering that in Holly's case there are a lot of teens/young adults communicating with one another, who tend to use txt messaging often.

I've been somewhat amazed that since Holly was abducted, no one has spoken up and said "I got a text from so-and-so".

Right. Apparently, word got out and everyone already knew somehow. The school knew. Holly's best friend knew. Her teacher knew. They both cried in class when Holly didn't show up at 8 am for her exam.

I guess there is no need for text messaging in Darden, TN.

Ironic isn't it? Everyone knew about her disappearance immediately but over a year later nobody knows anything.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

If we are all still alive a decade or two from now...I fear this case will be just as mystifying and may gain fame only by being one of the weirdest missing persons cases ever...

I remember when this case first broke, there were thousands of people out searching for Holly (and this is a rural area, so it had to be a big % of the population) and now there's nothing about the case, and there's been nothing for months.

 

[SmoothOperator]

I'm confused(quite possibly just misunderstanding, tho) so I wanted to have someone clarify my point of confusion/misunderstanding.. It's regarding the upthread discussion about the free standing, completely unattached building that's been referred to as a separate two stall garage/carport, as well as a shed or storage space.. My opinion was always that it was a 2 stall, 3 sides enclosed, with open front carport.. And to my knowledge it has always been present on the Bobo property, out back(as the attached image shows below).. ATLEAST it has been there prior to April 13, 2011 as is seen on multiple different listings such as property records, real estate sites such as zillow, google/bing maps, etc..

So, is this what is being referred to upthread as having been built onto the Bobo property at some point after April 13, 2011?.. I believe it was chilie fries that mentioned a structure having been erected on the property at some point in this last year.. I am quite likely mistaken in my understanding it to have been this carport, free standing structure that's at the back of the property, that was referred to as newly built(within the last year).. But that's what I thought was being referred to..

Anyone who can please correct me where it is I'm obviously confused or misunderstanding.... TIA..

And what structure or building has been newly erected since Holly's abduction??

Again thanks to whoever can clear this up for me..



____________________...
Posting via mobile as well as via tablet so plz forgive all typos.. Btwn the sucky touch keyboard and the obsessive auto-correct it's a big ol' mess :crazy:

 

[Plumeria5]

I'm confused(quite possibly just misunderstanding, tho) so I wanted to have someone clarify my point of confusion/misunderstanding.. It's regarding the upthread discussion about the free standing, completely unattached building that's been referred to as a separate two stall garage/carport, as well as a shed or storage space.. My opinion was always that it was a 2 stall, 3 sides enclosed, with open front carport.. And to my knowledge it has always been present on the Bobo property, out back(as the attached image shows below).. ATLEAST it has been there prior to April 13, 2011 as is seen on multiple different listings such as property records, real estate sites such as zillow, google/bing maps, etc..

So, is this what is being referred to upthread as having been built onto the Bobo property at some point after April 13, 2011?.. I believe it was chilie fries that mentioned a structure having been erected on the property at some point in this last year.. I am quite likely mistaken in my understanding it to have been this carport, free standing structure that's at the back of the property, that was referred to as newly built(within the last year).. But that's what I thought was being referred to..

Anyone who can please correct me where it is I'm obviously confused or misunderstanding.... TIA..

And what structure or building has been newly erected since Holly's abduction??

Again thanks to whoever can clear this up for me..
View attachment 24165


____________________...
Posting via mobile as well as via tablet so plz forgive all typos.. Btwn the sucky touch keyboard and the obsessive auto-correct it's a big ol' mess :crazy:

I think Chili Fries, in a later post, said she was mistaken. That structure was there at the time of Holly's disappearance.

 

[~n/t~]

Chili clarified her post.

 

[Whisperer]

How in the world did Clint see them kneeling in the attached carport/garage? If both cars were there, that's a tight fit. How could he see them w/o being outside? If somebody was kneeling between two vehicles, that should have sent him out there pronto. Exactly where was Clint watching them, kneeling, sitting, etc. If true, this tells me his car was not in that garage as claimed.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Thanks I obviously should've kept reading instead of popping in and out.. thanks

 

[MizStery]

This interview was conducted April 20,2011. Pat Brown, asks the same questions then..... that we are puzzling over to this day.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/20/ng.01.html

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER, AUTHOR OF "THE PROFILER": Well, Deborah, you certainly can`t ignore something like that. I mean we see people repeat MOs, and if these MOs are similar, that`s going to go right up on the radar.*

But what I think what everybody is having so much trouble with in these cases is all the evasiveness. The evasiveness from the family, the evasiveness from the brother, the evasiveness from the police. And we`re not getting answers. Things are just -- seem like we should be able to get answers to, like when was the 911 call made? Did the dogs find a trail into the woods?*

I mean if her blood is out there spattered somewhere, and it`s her blood, which
are not going to tell us either, why wouldn`t the dogs follow that trail to the woods?

Then we also have the lunchbox problem. I mean if you have somebody dragging a women into the woods, why does her lunchbox which should be in her hand show up eight miles away? I don`t think she`s going to be clutching it
for eight miles of walking the woods. It doesn`t even make sense.*

NORVILLE: Do you think that`s a red herring that the guy has planted?

BROWN: You know I think there`s a lot of things about this case that we don`t
know. I don`t know if there`s a staged crime going on here. I don`t know -- we just don`t have the information so that we can put things together and make sense.

But I think it`s extremely important for the family to come forth and be very open and the police as well because I think there`s some people out there searching and searching, wanting to find Holly, and they`re getting frustrated because they`re thinking, wait a minute, maybe we`re searching for no reason.*

And I don`t think they want to think that way. I think they want to find Holly. I think they want to bring her home. I think they want to know if there`s a true abductor. So they can go out there and do their best. I think they need to just be a little bit more open and help everybody out here.

 

[Carla Lashelle]

I have a lot of issues with Pat Brown in general. She is a paid talking head... and paid to have an opinion... paid to be controversial and edgy. Paid to stir things up and provide an often contrary view of things. She says the same things about a lot of cases. There is a reason most of these paid TV consultants are EX investigators, EX profilers etc. I just can't put a lot of stock in what they say even if its true. If PB said the sky is blue and the water is wet, I wouldn't really believe her.

 

[MizStery]

I have a lot of issues with Pat Brown in general. She is a paid talking head... and paid to have an opinion... paid to be controversial and edgy. Paid to stir things up and provide an often contrary view of things. She says the same things about a lot of cases. There is a reason most of these paid TV consultants are EX investigators, EX profilers etc. I just can't put a lot of stock in what they say even if its true. If PB said the sky is blue and the water is wet, I wouldn't really believe her.

The first time in my life I had heard of Pat Brown was the video ChiliFries posted. Perhaps,rather than setting her up as the 'authority' on criminal profiling...I thought it interesting that as early as April 20 ..she was raising the same concerns we are still wrestling with.

On another subject way back in thread #26 you made reference to a interview
with Levi Page:
Quote Carla Lashelle:
Levi Page interview with the homicide prosecutor is interesting

"we are talking real(sic) Tennessee here..."
(real=rural) MOO

Somewhat critical, suspicious over some of Clint's statements. Says there is evidence that he DID say she was dragged into the woods and then recanted.


Is there a transcript or audio of that interview?

 

[Chili Fries]

How in the world did Clint see them kneeling in the attached carport/garage? If both cars were there, that's a tight fit. How could he see them w/o being outside? If somebody was kneeling between two vehicles, that should have sent him out there pronto. Exactly where was Clint watching them, kneeling, sitting, etc. If true, this tells me his car was not in that garage as claimed.

I don't believe we've ever heard that Clint's car was parked in the garage that day.

One thing I have asked, is how Clint didn't see Holly's car in the garage. He has said that he initially thought (when he saw the silhouettes) that Holly was already at school. I guess her car could have been parked farther back in the garage though, so it was obscured by the wall.

 

[Chili Fries]

Another thing, I wouldn't put that much stock into what Pat Brown says. I've seen her talk about a lot of these cases and honestly I don't value her opinions any more than a random message board poster. I just posted that video because it has the best aerial views of the house I've seen.

And, as I've said before, it's the same thing with AMW. I've watched that show twice since they did the segment on Holly, and both times they got important stuff wrong about the Mickey Shunick case. They even mistakenly showed a picture of a truck that Lafayette police cleared instead of showing the vitally important pic of the truck police were still looking for. I know John Walsh's heart is in the right place but that show often stinks when it comes to getting important details right.

I feel the same way about Mark Fuhrman saying the dogs didn't pick up a scent. Until that is confirmed I'm very skeptical. Early in the investigation there is always incorrect info flying around, like Holly being dragged into the woods in this case. Same kind of thing happened with Hailey Dunn, supposedly dogs followed her scent to a motel but as more info came out that turned out to be wrong.

Hope I cleared nothing up for you all.

 

[Chili Fries]

Chili clarified her post.

Thanks.

P.S. - I'm all man.

 

[wishuwerehere]

The only info which supports an abduction theory is coming from Clint.

The last person known to be alone with Holly is Clint.

Clint’s telling of events doesn’t make any sense.

AFAIK Clint has not taken a polygraph test.

LE has not cleared Clint.

I smell a duck.

jmo

 

[Plumeria5]

The only info which supports an abduction theory is coming from Clint.

The last person known to be alone with Holly is Clint.

Clint’s telling of events doesn’t make any sense.

AFAIK Clint has not taken a polygraph test.

LE has not cleared Clint.

I smell a duck.

jmo

:rubberducky:

Quack!

 

[nosyone]

I find it strange that media like Nancy Grace didn't take this case and run with it like Natalie Holloway, Caylee Anthony or Jon Benet Ramsey. The interest is certainly there, Websleuths is a perfect example, we are all still here going over and over what we know (which is next to nil) 14 months later. Go figure!

 

[Plumeria5]

I find it strange that media like Nancy Grace didn't take this case and run with it like Natalie Holloway, Caylee Anthony or Jon Benet Ramsey. The interest is certainly there, Websleuths is a perfect example, we are all still here going over and over what we know (which is next to nil) 14 months later. Go figure!

I've wondered the same thing. Was it ever on NG? If so did she interview anyone?

 

[dejavoodoo64]

This interview was conducted April 20,2011. Pat Brown, asks the same questions then..... that we are puzzling over to this day.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/20/ng.01.html

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER, AUTHOR OF "THE PROFILER": Well, Deborah, you certainly can`t ignore something like that. I mean we see people repeat MOs, and if these MOs are similar, that`s going to go right up on the radar.*

But what I think what everybody is having so much trouble with in these cases is all the evasiveness. The evasiveness from the family, the evasiveness from the brother, the evasiveness from the police. And we`re not getting answers. Things are just -- seem like we should be able to get answers to, like when was the 911 call made? Did the dogs find a trail into the woods?*

I mean if her blood is out there spattered somewhere, and it`s her blood, which
are not going to tell us either, why wouldn`t the dogs follow that trail to the woods?

Then we also have the lunchbox problem. I mean if you have somebody dragging a women into the woods, why does her lunchbox which should be in her hand show up eight miles away? I don`t think she`s going to be clutching it
for eight miles of walking the woods. It doesn`t even make sense.*

NORVILLE: Do you think that`s a red herring that the guy has planted?

BROWN: You know I think there`s a lot of things about this case that we don`t
know. I don`t know if there`s a staged crime going on here. I don`t know -- we just don`t have the information so that we can put things together and make sense.

But I think it`s extremely important for the family to come forth and be very open and the police as well because I think there`s some people out there searching and searching, wanting to find Holly, and they`re getting frustrated because they`re thinking, wait a minute, maybe we`re searching for no reason.*

And I don`t think they want to think that way. I think they want to find Holly. I think they want to bring her home. I think they want to know if there`s a true abductor. So they can go out there and do their best. I think they need to just be a little bit more open and help everybody out here.

Yep, and here we sit over a year later still trying to give a damn when it seems her own home town and family doesn't anymore. If it was one of my children, I would be in jail by now for raising so much hell with everybody.:jail: