View Single Post
Old 07-04-2014, 01:55 PM   #87
Senior Member
justins5256's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 08, 2002
Posts: 3,843

Originally Posted by zack007attack
In that scenario, they would probably take the bike in order to minimize any trail of evidence they might have left behind which would buy them some time to get away. Plus it would have been easy and quick for them to stuff the bike in their truck or van; if they were in a sedan it would have taken them a little while and a passing motorist might have noticed.
I think some pieces of her Walkman and a cassette tape she was listening to were found along the highway. Granted, I never really considered the implications of this before, but I think this might be move evidence in favor of the accidental hit theory. The Walkman could have been damaged during the accident and the assailants neglected to pick it up in their haste to quickly clean up (before other motorists came by) and flee the scene.

Originally Posted by elg0rd0
The big picture here, is that it has never been proven Tara was abducted beyond a shadow of a doubt. The polaroid itself is circumstantial at best. Who knows maybe she took a longer route than usual and disappeared of her own free will. I've heard of cases where a person, primarily a young adult, went out to do an everyday activity and just literally walked away from everything. They started a new life, got a new job, got married, had kids, etc.

I once heard of a case where an 18 year old girl left to get milk at the grocery store and just disappeared. Her family found her 8 years later working at a WalMart in a neighboring state. She had a husband and 2 kids and refused to talk to her family.

Again I don't think the photo proves anything on the theory of Tara being abducted.
I've never heard of a run away theory in this case. While I suppose it is possible, there really isn't any evidence of it that I am aware. Everything I have read about the case makes it sound as if Tara's disappearance, whatever the motivations and the mechanics behind it ultimately were, was not voluntary.

Also, I think people get too hung up on the Polaroid. There could be multiple scenarios here.

A. Tara was abducted, and IS the girl in the Polaroid.
B. Tara was abducted and IS NOT the girl in the Polaroid.
C. Tara was the victim of a hit and run and IS NOT the girl in the Polaroid.

The only scenario that explains both Tara's disappearance AND the Polaroid together is the first one. The other two explain Tara's disappearance, but not the facts behind what's going on in the Polaroid.

The more I think about this whole thing, the more I think the girl in the Polaroid was NOT Tara. I mean, the photo was found quite a distance away from where Tara disappeared, several months after the fact. The FBI was never able to confirm that the girl in the Polaroid was Tara, nor were researchers at Los Alamos. The possibility that Tara was the girl in the Polaroid was suggested by her parents after they saw the photo in the media. I hate to say this, but parents in missing persons cases will often grasp at whatever straws they can to believe that their child is alive. So, the possibility of the girl being Tara provided some hope that she may one day come home. Unfortunately, I just don't think the girl was Tara. There really is no evidence that it was aside from the parent's hunch. Also, not to mention that Henley's parents were certain he was the boy in the photo. We know that can't be the case.
justins5256 is offline   Reply With Quote