NE TYLER GOODRICH: Missing from Lincoln, NE - 3 Nov 2023 - Age 35

Missing Lincoln man has ‘gone off the grid’, sheriff’s office says

After leaving his home in southwest Lincoln on Friday, there has been no sign of 35-year-old Tyler Goodrich.

www.1011now.com

Missing Lincoln man has ‘gone off the grid’, sheriff’s office says​

After leaving his home in southwest Lincoln on Friday, there has been no sign of 35-year-old Tyler Goodrich.

Deputies from the Lancaster County Sheriff’s Office were initially called to the Yankee Hill neighborhood Friday at 7:45 p.m. for a verbal disagreement between Goodrich and his husband Marshall Vogel. However, upon arrival, Goodrich had already left, and since no criminal activity was found, LSO left the area.

Vogel then called LSO at 9:35 p.m. the following day to report Goodrich as missing. Goodrich is 6′2, 180 pounds and was last seen wearing running shorts, a sweatshirt that zips, gray running shoes, and a Garmin watch, with his phone and wallet in hand.

“The reason we are so concerned is because he has gone off the grid,” said Chief Deputy Benjamin Houchin. “We do not have any information. His phone is not on and we know that he has not had any financials.”

LSO said the family has cooperated in the investigation and even organized a search party with some friends on Sunday. People close to Goodrich said his phone last pinged near Southwest 10th and West Van Dorn streets. On Sunday, they searched that area for Goodrich, but didn’t find anything.


MEDIA - TYLER GOODRICH: Missing from Lincoln, NE - 3 Nov 2023 - Age 35

 

[GrandmaBear]

What I'm confused about is if he took off AS LE was getting there? Before? After? It kind of seems to be as or right before. Could the call have been about them having a fight and Tyler taking off and threatening self harm? It makes it make more sense for them to hurry there for a domestic that only involved yelling and why his husband would call after just having a verbal fight.

I think it more likely this was no simple verbal disagreement and that it got physical OR there is a history of such and/or he knew one of them was going to jail and it would be him whether because there was injury or just because laws in most states require one party goes to jail in a response to a domestic. Maybe also he has a record or was already under some conditions from some case. That's why I'd like to know the background and court background, etc. Or say the partner has a black eye and a dislocated jaw or something then verbal isn't going to fly.. I am of COURSE speculating, I don't even know that Tyler is the bad one in the relationship/abuser. It DOES seem likely though that there was such a relationship. LIKELY, not CERTAIN.

It would help if we knew WHO called and WHY. It would also help in who said it was only verbal and when. It could just be a neighbor saying it is verbal, they hear shouting, verbal fighting and when asked if physical say they don't know but that they hear slamming of walls, furniture falling or breaking, etc. but not sure if any physical assault, who KNOWS is what I am saying...

It seems likely Tyler took off when he realized cops were called and if so this puts the caller in their home OR he took off when he heard sirens or if a neighbor yelled that they were calling the cops... Or yelled cops are on their way...

I base this on knowledge of such being COMMON in this type of situation. They abuse and are out of control UNTIL the only thing that can get them to stop is getting it through their head cops are coming and then they bolt or the threaten the wife and/or family to keep their mouths shut/lie if they don't have time to bolt.

I think he is missing voluntarily. Not positive but it is where I lean.

 

[Guess Who]

Right he may well have had his reasons. OR he may not have wanted them talked to under ANY circumstances. Hard to say. I just recall it mentioned. She asked their ages and if they'd been interviewed and I responded with the little I knew.

I can even understand a parent NOT wanting them interviewed even with representation or with a parent present even, I mean the are children and most any of us would want to protect them from any effects of dad missing and questions from cops, etc. However, it can also mean they are concerned about what their children may share.

I didn't give an opinion and I don't have one as we don't know enough. Do we even know the men's ages?

I lean heavily to there is a DA or DV situation here but not 100 percent on who the abusive one is... And it seems likely the kids are not unaware of this if they live in the home and cops were called over a verbal argument which, by the way, I don't believe. But we don't know who called, could have been a neighbor or EVEN one of their children. I'd also hazard a guess the missing man is the abusive one and ran off before cops could come and he possibly face arrest.

I also more than suspect the other one think he may be missing voluntarily. But I haven't ruled out the other either as some things just don't make sense. He very well could have come back to the home if that was him running off. We know what he looks like, do we know what the other guy looks like?

Are these the bio children of one dad but not the other or are the adopted? If there IS DV, or a histsory of such, has CPS ever been involved? I mean I am sorry but there IS a lot to wonder about here...These things aren't known by us but likely are by cops and neighbors and family quite possibly. Were they in the midst of some problem or their relationship on the outs?

If missing man is missing by choice, he sure has brought this family front and center and it is only getting started. And is putting his mate and children through heck. That much is clear.

What I do not believe is he ran off and some stranger ran into him and killed him, etc. He is missing voluntarily or the hub did something to him. I guess he could have ran off and suicided but I don't find that likely either. I read some here while at work today so I have already seen a few of the following posts. I know he had a text and a call, or something like that, not long before leaving or made one (I only had seconds, not 100 percent which way that was until I read it again). Hopefully shortly.

All I can say is that if they had came at me accusingly to the point I felt I needed an attorney, there is no way they are going to do that to my kids without representation. Nope. Not happening so they can twist their minds around and make something that has nothing to do with anything a thing. Like i've stated many times, there is no valid question they can't ask just because somebody is there to protect them. None.

 

[GrandmaBear]

FACEBOOK PAGE:

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

TIMELINE from that page:

Timeline of known events - to help clarify questions or misconceptions. We will edit and update this timeline if any information is shared with family that is relevant.

Friday, Nov. 3
*Tyler went to work in Omaha (confirmed by his coworkers).
*Tyler was seen on camera at Costco in Lincoln around 5:30 p.m.
*LSO has confirmed as well that Tyler was home Friday evening. His car is still at home so we believe he left on foot.
*Tyler and his husband have an argument. LSO was called due to a disturbance, Tyler leaves the house on foot with his Samsung flip phone and ridge wallet. At the time Tyler was wearing grey shorts, zip up sweatshirt and his running shoes. Tyler responds to a text message and makes a phone call (UNANSWERED) around 7:30 p.m. Tyler leaves the house on foot, confirmed by cameras (runs south). LSO show up to the house at 8:00 p.m. and talk with husband, Tyler is not there. According to the LSO press release there was no crime so they left. No further calls or messages from Tyler’s phone. It is believed at this time it had been shut off (time estimate is 7:45 p.m.). This is the last known ping from the phone was at Tyler’s home.

Saturday, Nov. 4
*Saturday morning husband contacts friends looking for Tyler, but no one had seen him
*Friend of the couple shared a Snapchat location screenshot (area of SW 10th & W. Van Dorn) which had shown 13hrs prior. The screenshot of the snapchat was taken at 8:43 a.m. Saturday, which would put Tyler's phone on around 7:45 p.m. (night before)
*Husband files missing person report at 9:35 a.m. and property is searched for Tyler. Friends and family start looking for Tyler in the area.


Friends and family continue walking trails of the last pinged location starting around noon knowing Tyler knew the trails well and ran them frequently ⁃ Sheriff’s search property and home ⁃ Search party spread all throughout trails near and around home and last pinged location; both LSO as well as LPD are heavily involved doing their part, brining in helicopters, drones, etc. investigating all avenues and taking this very seriously. The investigation is being organized and proper protocols taken. They are looking at every angle and have brought in 2 people from the FBI to assist as well as using scent dogs.

**We also know Tyler missed a speaking engagement Saturday morning that he previously confirmed he would be at and also did not show up to the Good Life Halfsy race which he had been training for.

So this makes no sense unless when he ran off he lingered in dark outside around home and then came back home a few minutes later to where phone last pinged and was then shut off. So does he wait until LE leaves and then re-enter the home...? I am going by the Friday time entries. And the statement the last ping was in his home. They put things in what seems to be in order but don't state time leaving other than after this text and call at 7:30 but then by last ping and time shut off he was back at home...? Or never left yard or went far and was back at home...? AMD THEN phone goes dead.

I guess based on that I can sure see cops searches of the home and questions for the hub...

 

[GrandmaBear]

Ahhh, I hadn't realized there were two different calls and he wasn't back from the first call so reported missing the next morning. That makes a little bit more sense now. I don't do fb and had not seen this info in the few articles i've read or they were as clear as mud about it.

I got that one right from the beginning and I've only read here so you must have missed it. Let's remember though that we don't know the call the night he ran off was from the hub, may have been a neighbor or someone else in the home. One thing says reported a disturbance I read in posts here somewhere now, so that would lead one to think a neighbor... But yeah hub called him in missing next morning claiming he never came home...

 

[GrandmaBear]

Yeah I just found it after you had asked about the timeline.
Also, the original article in the report says the missing persons report was filed at 9:35 pm, but the Facebook says 9:35 am. I think am is more likely but would be nice to clarify.

Hmm I saw somewhere in first day or so of this case that it was the next morning he was reported missing. I have only read here so not sure how i knew that. I read i think the first two links and then have read comments...

 

[GrandmaBear]

He appears to have a light on him? Is that the cell phone? I thought they said the last paying for the cell phone was at home? I’m a little confused there.

I’m leaning toward he was distraught and something happened to him when he ran off. Are there bodies of water nearby or anything like that?

Join the club, the last ping at the home makes no sense to me either unless he never left the yard/area and then came right back home or never left.

I don't think there was any accident unless he was suicidal and had an intentional mishap. Jmo. I figured he was gone voluntarily and staying gone by choice is where I was leaning but now looking at the timeline more closely (I saw it yesterday but had NO time) now I wonder if he ever left home or the surrounding area and DID come back home. Came back in and fight continued/ensued and something was done to him. Cleanup commenced, story arranged, reported missing next day. This timeline and last ping show why LE was/is questioning the spouse and searching the home and even why there was cause most likely.

Were these children home or GONE?

And what IS the history here with this couple and this family?

 

[Guess Who]

Join the club, the last ping at the home makes no sense to me either unless he never left the yard/area and then came right back home or never left.

I don't think there was any accident unless he was suicidal and had an intentional mishap. Jmo. I figured he was gone voluntarily and staying gone by choice is where I was leaning but now looking at the timeline more closely (I saw it yesterday but had NO time) now I wonder if he ever left home or the surrounding area and DID come back home. Came back in and fight continued/ensued and something was done to him. Cleanup commenced, story arranged, reported missing next day. This timeline and last ping show why LE was/is questioning the spouse and searching the home and even why there was cause most likely.

Were these children home or GONE?

And what IS the history here with this couple and this family?

"home" might also be really close to home. It appears that the pic was taken very near the home. I've seen in the comments on a couple of videos that locals have it figured out where the camera is and it's most likely within a block. If they are in an area that often bounces between towers, the location isn't as precise, so "home" might not be at the actual home itself, but very near.

It also could be that it isn't a phone we are seeing, too.

 

[GrandmaBear]

They've supposedly searched the body of water that would have been on the path he presumably was running towards.

I'm not sure about the light. We have two night time runners in my neighborhood that have a light they run with for visibility. Theirs don't look quite like that, but I've never looked at them running by on a camera with night vision, either to know exactly how the cameras pick it up. It does also look like it could be a phone. Maybe that's when he was turning it off. That pic appears to be right near the home, so if they were going by pings, it might show as at or near the home. I was curious about that light, too.

I took it to be their own camera on was it the west side of the home? I read it somewhere here in a link I think in the last day or two. It SOUNDED like it was theirs although I guess it could be a neighbor's BUT that video is him on the side of the house as he took off. It is what I read somewhere. I amazed myself to realize on occasion I do read some links with the total lack of time to do so I have. Lol.

 

[GrandmaBear]

All I can say is that if they had came at me accusingly to the point I felt I needed an attorney, there is no way they are going to do that to my kids without representation. Nope. Not happening so they can twist their minds around and make something that has nothing to do with anything a thing. Like i've stated many times, there is no valid question they can't ask just because somebody is there to protect them. None.

And I don't disagree and never have but it doesn't mean we can be sure his reasons are not more than that. One never can be sure. Yes it makes perfect sense for any parent to do that and protect the kids and themselves. No argument.

There was enough for a search warrant though. And some things do not add up here. And Lord knows what LE has versus what we know.

I feel I know you well enough (even though never "met"), that if some disappearance happened in your family, and you were being questioned and got a lawyer, I'd never think you had anything to do with the disappearance but I don't know sh*t about him so who knows the reasons or what ALL the reasons are and there really is a SPOUSE missing and for how many days now and they got enough for a warrant and the timeline and ping at home isn't adding up...

But yes, I agree lawyering up is smart and one has every right to do so AND protect their kids. No argument.

 

[Guess Who]

And I don't disagree and never have but it doesn't mean we can be sure his reasons are not more than that. One never can be sure. Yes it makes perfect sense for any parent to do that and protect the kids and themselves. No argument.

There was enough for a search warrant though. And some things do not add up here. And Lord knows what LE has versus what we know.

I feel I know you well enough (even though never "met"), that if some disappearance happened in your family, and you were being questioned and got a lawyer, I'd never think you had anything to do with the disappearance but I don't know sh*t about him so who knows the reasons or what ALL the reasons are and there really is a SPOUSE missing and for how many days now and they got enough for a warrant and the timeline and ping at home isn't adding up...

But yes, I agree lawyering up is smart and one has every right to do so AND protect their kids. No argument.

That was just for the ones that immediately think guilt because one lawyers up and a possible reason why he wouldn't "allow" the kids to be interviewed. We still have some that believe that investigators CAN'T interview anybody because they have an attorney. That is FAR from the truth. They just can't interview you without your attorney present. It's on them then to interview accordingly. If they do not want to interview you just because you have an attorney, that, to me, means they really had no real questions they wanted you to answer and just wanted to interrogate you (or you kids).

 

[GrandmaBear]

"home" might also be really close to home. It appears that the pic was taken very near the home. I've seen in the comments on a couple of videos that locals have it figured out where the camera is and it's most likely within a block. If they are in an area that often bounces between towers, the location isn't as precise, so "home" might not be at the actual home itself, but very near.

It also could be that it isn't a phone we are seeing, too.

It is funny how specific hub is on the two items he grabbed and took with. Clothing in this one is pretty specific too. Did he wear shorts to work or change when he got home? Does the spouse work or stay home with young kids? Or teenagers? We don't know although maybe some SM group does. Seems he went to work, worked all day and stopped at Costco I'd guess on some family errand. Was he buying diapers or athletic gear for teens? Costco doesn't seem the kind of place you'd just swing off for a loaf of bread or a jug of milk needed for supper or breakfast. Also doesn't seem like you'd do a full on huge haul after work either. And then he headed home most likely after a full on hard day and stop for some necessity and in short order they were arguing... Of course this is all IF he wasn't done with work earlier and then went back to Costco after changing into shorts, etc. I can't recall if it said I just assumed it was after work on the way as he'd worked that day. Long week too probably as this was Friday if he worked all week. Probably long week for spouse to if doesn't work and home with kids all week. Sounds like for a couple who MAY have a DV situation, a ripe time for stressors and problems. I am just working some thoughts out, I could be way off base...

I think any couple who raised children WITHOUT a DV component can relate or take an educated guess of how this evening went or the different expectations and needs. It all isn't easy. And that's without having any other unusual stressors or problems in the relationship or the life of one of them, etc. Just normal routines and work, children, marriage, etc.

None of this answers anything of course, I'm just working out the likely day as I type and think. Both may work but IF there is a breadwinner and a stay at home parent, it would seem to indicate a scenario on this order of a relationship.

Tyler ran. Tyler missed some race and was training for it. Tyler worked. Tyler missed some other thing he had agreed to. Tyler ran errands or at least it seemed with one that night. So Tyler had a life outside the home. And all of this and assuming he had a full time job take a ton of the few available hours we all have for family, sleep, etc. Did the hub have a life outside home? Was he happy hat not only did T have all the normal time taking things going on, he also used off hours to agree to thing for others and do his own thing of running and competing in races? You're finally hitting the weekend and hoping hub has time for you and family but...

I know this may all sound stupid, I get it, but the normal big picture and the mundane things we never know in cases I think are some of the most relevant.

Of course in this "case" it isn't even known if there is a crime and not just an adult willingly missing. BUT are we to believe he just blew off his job, his life, his planned activities...

Well in talking this out I have two theories and one is the same theory with a twist. I started off the day on voluntarily missing until I read with more time and attention the timeline and ping at home thing again and until I talked this other part out here....

I now have a bit more fully formed thoughts... Short of keystone cops and judges who issue warrants for no reason, there was reason the focus was on the home and hub and that a warrant was obtained. It is Nebraska but it IS bigger city, Lincoln. For the MOMENT, that is numero uno for me, I am going to give benefit of doubt to LE and judge signing warrant and assume there is reason and the timeline and ping at home and disagreement the night before add to all that.

Second some type of "fight or argument" was enough that someone called cops whether neighbors, children, hub and I don't take the verbal thing as fact.

Third the timeline and the ping at home do not add up unless confusing info that has not been cleared up is the reason.

Fourth there well could be a DV history and that's not a wild speculation.

Then as I have worked out here, even without problems with children or one or other issues in life, we have a normal stressful week at its end but not at its end as far as Tyler's plans. Add in other normal factors, child care, child issues, dinner, spouse maybe needing some help with kids, etc. and yeah just that we all know how hard this can be on EACH partner.

We know the children are not bio children of both. It IS possible they are of one from a prior relationship and there IS a female mentioned in the early links as to not a lot of detail, just sounding like she may be pointing to Tyler's hub. It really doesn't say, we are left to infer. Is it an ex wife of one? Mother of children? Or is it a mother of one of the men or sister. Who knows...

The man is missing, for THIRTEEN days now. I just now realized that. If he IS missing voluntarily and cares about his job, his children or stepchildren (who knows?), his spouse and what they are being put through at all AND his own family, he'd come back. If he sees all the online scrutiny and is seeing what his hub is put through and that they want to question the children, and he cared, wouldn't he come back unless he is self first always?

So I am revising my voluntarily missing I started off with this morning to leaning more towards where it seemed LE was a few days back. I may revise again and am not SOLD on it. I remain with voluntary or something happened at home. The twist is that hub could know where he is and is part o fit. I find that way more unlikely and a bit of a rabbit hole thought and it is not fully formed and I don't lean towards it but depending on what issues were going on in their lives I could consider it but I won't even give the reasons and they are not fully formed.

 

[GrandmaBear]

That was just for the ones that immediately think guilt because one lawyers up and a possible reason why he wouldn't "allow" the kids to be interviewed. We still have some that believe that investigators CAN'T interview anybody because they have an attorney. That is FAR from the truth. They just can't interview you without your attorney present. It's on them then to interview accordingly. If they do not want to interview you just because you have an attorney, that, to me, means they really had no real questions they wanted you to answer and just wanted to interrogate you (or you kids).

Well it is true though they don't need to agree to ever interview or sit down even with attorney present. It can't be required and I think that is where that comes from PLUS most attorneys just say no, don't do it, I advise we NOT do it. it rarely happens what you say of they can still question with an attorney present, it just is rare right? Attorney advises generally to share NOTHING and answer NOTHING.

I don't know where you get the idea most defense attorneys IF LE asked would agree to a sit down? Or advise their client to do so even while they are there stopping any questions they don't want them to respond to? A good one MIGHT agree to sit down with their client with LE IF they thought what the client shared that LE did not know would CLEAR him or maybe just to be seen as cooperative but that's rare imo.

So no, I don't judge for retaining an attorney or not realize it may be due to protecting children, offering your home to be searched more than once and then it never ends and cops keep asking for more, to search, to interview children and nothing is enough and yes that they may be trying to trick, trap, lie to get to the truth. I get it. I don't assume guilt for retaining one BUT I do not exclude the possibility that that IS their reason and they can't adequately answer questions, let them search all areas, etc., etc. Not saying that is the case here, just saying they may have guilty reasons for retaining one and limiting, we don't KNOW but yes, it could just be because they are gearing towards you and you are innocent AND you want to protect your children, your privacy, your life.

So I don'tn assume it but again in speculation I put it together with other known things to decide. There WAS a 911 call about a domestic the night before. One of the two was missing. The phone last ping places him at home. AND a big one for me is that they were able to get a warrant. Now I'm not sure we know how broad of one and we sure don't know the basis given the judge signed off on it for but ASSUMING we have fair LE and a fair judge doing his/her job, there is reason to wonder here for all of these reasons what his true reason in this case is for lawyering up.

I don't asume generally all who do are guilty. I take it case by case. And I certainly do NOT disagree with enough reason for getting one can be just to protect children, self, life and privacy.

So just know in future conversations and cases, I am not assuming guilt ever just because of lawyering up.

Honestly today, I am about 50/50 on what the answer is in this one. I am not weighted too much in either direction but am leaning back since starting the day to him NOT being voluntarily missing...

 

[Guess Who]

Well it is true though they don't need to agree to ever interview or sit down even with attorney present. It can't be required and I think that is where that comes from PLUS most attorneys just say no, don't do it, I advise we NOT do it. it rarely happens what you say of they can still question with an attorney present, it just is rare right? Attorney advises generally to share NOTHING and answer NOTHING.

I don't know where you get the idea most defense attorneys IF LE asked would agree to a sit down? Or advise their client to do so even while they are there stopping any questions they don't want them to respond to? A good one MIGHT agree to sit down with their client with LE IF they thought what the client shared that LE did not know would CLEAR him or maybe just to be seen as cooperative but that's rare imo.

So no, I don't judge for retaining an attorney or not realize it may be due to protecting children, offering your home to be searched more than once and then it never ends and cops keep asking for more, to search, to interview children and nothing is enough and yes that they may be trying to trick, trap, lie to get to the truth. I get it. I don't assume guilt for retaining one BUT I do not exclude the possibility that that IS their reason and they can't adequately answer questions, let them search all areas, etc., etc. Not saying that is the case here, just saying they may have guilty reasons for retaining one and limiting, we don't KNOW but yes, it could just be because they are gearing towards you and you are innocent AND you want to protect your children, your privacy, your life.

So I don'tn assume it but again in speculation I put it together with other known things to decide. There WAS a 911 call about a domestic the night before. One of the two was missing. The phone last ping places him at home. AND a big one for me is that they were able to get a warrant. Now I'm not sure we know how broad of one and we sure don't know the basis given the judge signed off on it for but ASSUMING we have fair LE and a fair judge doing his/her job, there is reason to wonder here for all of these reasons what his true reason in this case is for lawyering up.

I don't asume generally all who do are guilty. I take it case by case. And I certainly do NOT disagree with enough reason for getting one can be just to protect children, self, life and privacy.

So just know in future conversations and cases, I am not assuming guilt ever just because of lawyering up.

Honestly today, I am about 50/50 on what the answer is in this one. I am not weighted too much in either direction but am leaning back since starting the day to him NOT being voluntarily missing...

Maybe it's only "rare" because that's what they want us to know? They only seem to go crying to the media about "not cooperating" when they choose to not interview with an attorney present. I think we just don't hear about the ones that are interviewed with an attorney present. I just know that IF that ever happened to me in them saying I was not cooperating and got an attorney and I was willing to be interviewed with an attorney present, I would be going screaming to the same media that I would IF they would agree to with an attorney and see how amazingly they decided to do it. That is exactly what happened in my local case. Amazing how they were then agreeing to interview the kids with certain parameters met, which is all the family was asking. Within a few days of the family's attorney going to the media stating what the police spokesman was saying to the media was not correct, it happened. Amazing how that worked.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

They've said Tyler's phone last pinged at home (or near his home) which is at Southwest 12th and West Burnham.
However, someone that his husband contacted sent him a screenshot of Snapchat map, which showed Tyler's location at or near Southwest 10th and Van Dorn.

This location is about 3 miles away.
I don't know the state of cell phone towers in Lincoln, Nebraska. But his last phone ping being at home doesn't make sense if he both called and texted while away from his home, and his phone was still on at least 15 minutes later several miles away. UNLESS there is only one cell tower that accepts phone pings for this entire area. Which...could be?

 

[Guess Who]

They've said Tyler's phone last pinged at home (or near his home) which is at Southwest 12th and West Burnham.
However, someone that his husband contacted sent him a screenshot of Snapchat map, which showed Tyler's location at or near Southwest 10th and Van Dorn.

This location is about 3 miles away.
I don't know the state of cell phone towers in Lincoln, Nebraska. But his last phone ping being at home doesn't make sense if he both called and texted while away from his home, and his phone was still on at least 15 minutes later several miles away. UNLESS there is only one cell tower that accepts phone pings for this entire area. Which...could be?

View attachment 20695

That's just it. We have no idea how the towers there connect. Plus, LE might have different info than the husband was able to create. The "find my phone" or "locate (insert name)" with any location sharing ap, etc. might very well show inaccurate info compared to what LE might be able to get. No telling with what little info WE have right now.

 

[Guess Who]

That's just it. We have no idea how the towers there connect. Plus, LE might have different info than the husband was able to create. The "find my phone" or "locate (insert name)" with any location sharing ap, etc. might very well show inaccurate info compared to what LE might be able to get. No telling with what little info WE have right now.

OR we are being lied to by either LE or the husband, so there's that, also.

 

[GrandmaBear]

Maybe it's only "rare" because that's what they want us to know? They only seem to go crying to the media about "not cooperating" when they choose to not interview with an attorney present. I think we just don't hear about the ones that are interviewed with an attorney present. I just know that IF that ever happened to me in them saying I was not cooperating and got an attorney and I was willing to be interviewed with an attorney present, I would be going screaming to the same media that I would IF they would agree to with an attorney and see how amazingly they decided to do it. That is exactly what happened in my local case. Amazing how they were then agreeing to interview the kids with certain parameters met, which is all the family was asking. Within a few days of the family's attorney going to the media stating what the police spokesman was saying to the media was not correct, it happened. Amazing how that worked.

I get your point, and a good point.

I doubt it is rare but it is possible. We do only hear cases media even covers which aren't many and they pick and choose their facts when they do and then are off to something else and never pick it up again.

I think in Ramsey they agreed to an interview with attorneys present and perhaps to polygraphs with their parameters, I don't quite recall. But again these are ones that get covered.

Still, I take it case by case and that's all we can do and we never know enough and it is just an interest, crime, and we can only speculate for the most part.

In this one, I see some reasons to wonder as to the lawyering up which may not be the ones you talk about generally. I don't know though, just kind of on a wait and see. I can see him doing it just for the real reasons of protecting family, life, home, privacy and self. I DO always consider that and understand it.

 

[GrandmaBear]

They've said Tyler's phone last pinged at home (or near his home) which is at Southwest 12th and West Burnham.
However, someone that his husband contacted sent him a screenshot of Snapchat map, which showed Tyler's location at or near Southwest 10th and Van Dorn.

This location is about 3 miles away.
I don't know the state of cell phone towers in Lincoln, Nebraska. But his last phone ping being at home doesn't make sense if he both called and texted while away from his home, and his phone was still on at least 15 minutes later several miles away. UNLESS there is only one cell tower that accepts phone pings for this entire area. Which...could be?

View attachment 20695

Yeah these are the problems. It would be a bit hard to believe that Lincoln, capital of Nebraska, population about 300,000 has such limited cell towers, etc. but it is Nebraska. None of us know how our states, towns and cities vary and we sure get surprised discussing it on here like not being able to pump one's own gas in some states lol, just for an example.

The part about three miles away I don't worry about in the sense of could he run that far as I did read some links in this one and he ran a lot of miles a day regularly it seems. But it does need to be wondered about as none of the times and ping at home, etc. line up. In that sense, it matters.

I will say this, it is often said adults, adult males, certain types don't get enough attention but here this case has us all pretty interested already and it is getting attention. It isn't a child or a cult or a Hollywood person, just some guy from Nebraska.

There isn't even reason to think there is any crime. Necessarily.

I sure wasn't looking for a new one or to get sucked in, I can't keep up with the ones I follow, yet here I am. Probably because the rest of you are talking and wondering.

Hoping he's alive but my two main thoughts are about 60/40 although that has went back and forth just today.

We need MORE info and clarification

 

[Guess Who]

Yeah these are the problems. It would be a bit hard to believe that Lincoln, capital of Nebraska, population about 300,000 has such limited cell towers, etc. but it is Nebraska. None of us know how our states, towns and cities vary and we sure get surprised discussing it on here like not being able to pump one's own gas in some states lol, just for an example.

The part about three miles away I don't worry about in the sense of could he run that far as I did read some links in this one and he ran a lot of miles a day regularly it seems. But it does need to be wondered about as none of the times and ping at home, etc. line up. In that sense, it matters.

I will say this, it is often said adults, adult males, certain types don't get enough attention but here this case has us all pretty interested already and it is getting attention. It isn't a child or a cult or a Hollywood person, just some guy from Nebraska.

There isn't even reason to think there is any crime. Necessarily.

I sure wasn't looking for a new one or to get sucked in, I can't keep up with the ones I follow, yet here I am. Probably because the rest of you are talking and wondering.

Hoping he's alive but my two main thoughts are about 60/40 although that has went back and forth just today.

We need MORE info and clarification

It also depends on the exact area. While at my house I have full reception but can go out just a little ways away, but still in the city and there is a spot with really bad reception. It also depends on the carrier.

 

[GrandmaBear]

It also depends on the exact area. While at my house I have full reception but can go out just a little ways away, but still in the city and there is a spot with really bad reception. It also depends on the carrier.

To respond to a couple of your posts yes, hub or LE may be lying and we definitely need more info to know.

To this post I'd say while of course that is generally true it doesn't mean it is that basic that LE is looking at/has and think they can determine more. I don't get or understand all the tech stuff LE and for sure the F B I can do but I know it is beyond a family app and they can likely go beyond a signal that isn't great.

We have hardly touched on the Snapchat thing but why is it they backtrack it how many hours to the night before...? Did someone see it and it was like FB is where it says posted 7 hours earlier? If so, why did no one see it prior. I know nothing of Snapchat other than some things one hears.

The most innocent explanation is that is often the case, news has things wrong, FB ha something wrong in the timeline or have inserted things learned over weeks as LE learned more and said differently as well.