Tommy Gibsons's body still missing despite father's conviction

[ghosthouse]

Originally Posted by Jon

I completely agree that everything about his case points to accident followed by a panicked cover-up. Probably a stray bullet, and it’s certainly possible that no one saw him get hit. There’s a tragic case that was profiled on Forensic Files where it was proven that a bullet fired at an outdoor firing range went over a beam, through boards and off a ceiling to killed a boy who was sitting in a “safety zone” indoors. The path of the bullet was as insane as that JFK “magic” bullet yet they proved it happened with forensics

There is nothing "magic" about the JFK bullet.

ducks

[PingAnser3]

Did this case make the Filmrise episodes?

[schmave]

It did not, but it is on YouTube.

[Clockwork]

Originally Posted by schmave

It did not, but it is on YouTube.

I've been looking for this for a while. Couldn't find it. Also, where is the Jeffrey MacDonald episode? I can't find that either. Sure enough it is what I remember it to be, the Gibson episode I mean. Larry said he passed the polygraph. I know if you are a cop you probably have more insight into how you do that. And I know if you are a true sociopath then you can probably pass it as well. But Larry passed it and there have been others that have failed this thing. It is always something that has given me a little pause.

[schmave]

Same. The page that has the Gibson videos is a gold mine for cases that FilmRise left out for whatever reason(s). Quite a few I have yet to watch there.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

In all seriousness, I will preface what I'm about to say with that I think Larry Gibson killed Tommy.

But even if Larry was an abusive parent (and I believe he was), that doesn't mean that what he did was premeditated. IMO, the most likely scenario is that Larry accidentally shot Tommy, and then with the help of his wife (and maybe brother) covered it up. In the UM segment, Larry's wife says that after she heard the gunshot, she could still hear Tommy playing. If this is true, then Larry would be innocent. I think he accidentally shot Tommy, went jogging, and came back and he and his wife discovered what had happened and then they covered it up.

" In April 1994, Larry was arrested and charged with Tommy's murder. Police made the arrest after Karen changed her story; she said that she watched from her bedroom window as Larry beat Tommy until he fell limp. She also said that she saw him put Tommy's body in a black trash bag, which he later placed in the trunk of his patrol car.

She said she was so scared of him that she hid in her bedroom closet. When he returned, he told her to tell the police that strangers took Tommy. She claimed that she did not tell police this story initially because he had told her that he would go to jail if she talked. He also said that he would come back and kill her if she did so.

She and Judith testified against Larry at his trial. Judith claimed that he was physically abusive toward Tommy, Karen, and their third child, Lisa (born after Tommy's disappearance). Witnesses, including family members and fellow churchgoers, claimed that Larry had threatened to kill Judith and Karen after the former left him.

His half-sister also testified that he had tearfully confessed to killing Tommy shortly after his disappearance. Prosecutors also claimed that he was repeatedly abusive toward him and stressed at the time because Judith was busy taking college classes."

source: https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Tommy_Gibson


One of the problems with these UM forum, is that people take the UM segment as gospel. If one would actually do research on the case, they will know the truth. UM never cared too much about facts of many cases, and often glossed over certain things (in this case, domestic abuse). It was well known that Larry beat his wife and kids when UM ran this segment, but they conveniently omitted it. It was not "sexy" enough for NBC, so they went with the ridiculous "shooting a cat" angle.

[Clockwork]

Originally Posted by jets4life

" In April 1994, Larry was arrested and charged with Tommy's murder. Police made the arrest after Karen changed her story; she said that she watched from her bedroom window as Larry beat Tommy until he fell limp. She also said that she saw him put Tommy's body in a black trash bag, which he later placed in the trunk of his patrol car.

She said she was so scared of him that she hid in her bedroom closet. When he returned, he told her to tell the police that strangers took Tommy. She claimed that she did not tell police this story initially because he had told her that he would go to jail if she talked. He also said that he would come back and kill her if she did so.

She and Judith testified against Larry at his trial. Judith claimed that he was physically abusive toward Tommy, Karen, and their third child, Lisa (born after Tommy's disappearance). Witnesses, including family members and fellow churchgoers, claimed that Larry had threatened to kill Judith and Karen after the former left him.

His half-sister also testified that he had tearfully confessed to killing Tommy shortly after his disappearance. Prosecutors also claimed that he was repeatedly abusive toward him and stressed at the time because Judith was busy taking college classes."

source: https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Tommy_Gibson


One of the problems with these UM forum, is that people take the UM segment as gospel. If one would actually do research on the case, they will know the truth. UM never cared too much about facts of many cases, and often glossed over certain things (in this case, domestic abuse). It was well known that Larry beat his wife and kids when UM ran this segment, but they conveniently omitted it. It was not "sexy" enough for NBC, so they went with the ridiculous "shooting a cat" angle.

I am certainly not ruling that whole side out. It could be true. One problem though is that the judge didn't seem to believe the story. He sentenced Larry to three years in prison if I recall. That's peanuts. It tells me the judge did not believe the testimony. Maybe it is true, but I never like the idea of a wife telling the story after a divorce happens. There just seems to be so much slant on it when that happens. Could be just me though.

One other thing though, where is his body? Why was it never found? Ever. Not with the shooting the cat theory, not with burying him in a trash bag, nothing. And how much time would Larry have had to bury a body that hasn't been found in 30 years? This is why this case baffles me. Larry does give off a negative vibe, but why did Judith not only not say anything about her son dying, but also come on the segment and DEFEND Larry? Only to then come up with a new story once she left him?

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by Clockwork

I am certainly not ruling that whole side out. It could be true. One problem though is that the judge didn't seem to believe the story. He sentenced Larry to three years in prison if I recall. That's peanuts. It tells me the judge did not believe the testimony. Maybe it is true, but I never like the idea of a wife telling the story after a divorce happens. There just seems to be so much slant on it when that happens. Could be just me though.

One other thing though, where is his body? Why was it never found? Ever. Not with the shooting the cat theory, not with burying him in a trash bag, nothing. And how much time would Larry have had to bury a body that hasn't been found in 30 years? This is why this case baffles me. Larry does give off a negative vibe, but why did Judith not only not say anything about her son dying, but also come on the segment and DEFEND Larry? Only to then come up with a new story once she left him?

This has always been the problem with the UM forum. People ignore the facts agreed upon in a court of law. You really think a TV show is more reliable than evidence presented in a court of law?

You do realise that Unsolved Mysteries is sometimes legally prevented from what they can and can't say about a potential suspect, since if they did, NBC could have been sued. In addition, why would witnesses lie in their testimony about Larry making threats of killing his family?

[Clockwork]

Originally Posted by jets4life

This has always been the problem with the UM forum. People ignore the facts agreed upon in a court of law. You really think a TV show is more reliable than evidence presented in a court of law?

You do realise that Unsolved Mysteries is sometimes legally prevented from what they can and can't say about a potential suspect, since if they did, NBC could have been sued. In addition, why would witnesses lie in their testimony about Larry making threats of killing his family?

I agree that UM is famous for not showing all of the details. This is nothing new. I am just wondering why Judith waiting three years before saying anything about her own son being killed. The conviction was largely based on her and Karen's testimony. I never like the circumstantial evidence being the key.

I am not saying Larry didn't do it, I think we all lean to the side that he did it accidentally in some sort of way. But why no sign of the body? Would Judith not at least have known the area at least that Larry put the body? I have talked to Larry before and he was surprisingly open to talk about the case. He states they have a cordial relationship now, him Judith and Karen. Now, is he lying? Yeah, maybe. But if that is true, then what the heck?

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by Clockwork

I agree that UM is famous for not showing all of the details. This is nothing new. I am just wondering why Judith waiting three years before saying anything about her own son being killed. The conviction was largely based on her and Karen's testimony. I never like the circumstantial evidence being the key.

I am not saying Larry didn't do it, I think we all lean to the side that he did it accidentally in some sort of way. But why no sign of the body? Would Judith not at least have known the area at least that Larry put the body? I have talked to Larry before and he was surprisingly open to talk about the case. He states they have a cordial relationship now, him Judith and Karen. Now, is he lying? Yeah, maybe. But if that is true, then what the heck?

Larry was a serial abuser who terrorised his family, threatening to kill his wife numerous time as well as beating his wife and children.

She was afraid for her life, after Larry killed on of the children. It sounds like she eventually got away from him, and went to the Police, despite Larry's threats.

[Clockwork]

Originally Posted by jets4life

Larry was a serial abuser who terrorised his family, threatening to kill his wife numerous time as well as beating his wife and children.

She was afraid for her life, after Larry killed on of the children. It sounds like she eventually got away from him, and went to the Police, despite Larry's threats.

I get it. Why didn't she get out when she had the chance though? If it is true that she knew he killed Tommy, why not only keep quiet but then have another kid with him? Surely she could have been offered protection if she came forward. I realize this is easy for me to say and it is hindsight being 20/20 and such but I have just always been bothered by the fact that neither Karen or Judith changed their story until after leaving Larry. I am not accusing her of "coaching" her to say, but why hasn't some evidence popped up about this case? Some physical evidence. That has always bothered me.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by jets4life

source: https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Tommy_Gibson


One of the problems with these UM forum, is that people take the UM segment as gospel. If one would actually do research on the case, they will know the truth. UM never cared too much about facts of many cases, and often glossed over certain things (in this case, domestic abuse). It was well known that Larry beat his wife and kids when UM ran this segment, but they conveniently omitted it. It was not "sexy" enough for NBC, so they went with the ridiculous "shooting a cat" angle.

You complain that others do not "research" outside of the UM segments, yet cite the UM Fandom Wiki as if it's some sort of source, lol.

I have addressed this here, where this newspaper article mentions inconsistencies in both Larry and his wife's accounts of the day Tommy disappeared. This article says Larry's daughter was placed under hypnosis and did not mention anything about seeing her father beating Tommy. I addressed that here. Larry Gibson was charged with "intentional murder and murder by abuse", but the jury convicted him of 2nd degree manslaughter and he was out of prison in 3 years. In other words, the jury didn't find the "sexy" assertion that he beat his son to death to be credible, but still believed he was responsible for his death and went with the "ridiculous" accidental shooting.

[jets4life]

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

You complain that others do not "research" outside of the UM segments, yet cite the UM Fandom Wiki as if it's some sort of source, lol.

I have addressed this here, where this newspaper article mentions inconsistencies in both Larry and his wife's accounts of the day Tommy disappeared. This article says Larry's daughter was placed under hypnosis and did not mention anything about seeing her father beating Tommy. I addressed that here. Larry Gibson was charged with "intentional murder and murder by abuse", but the jury convicted him of 2nd degree manslaughter and he was out of prison in 3 years. In other words, the jury didn't find the "sexy" assertion that he beat his son to death to be credible, but still believed he was responsible for his death and went with the "ridiculous" accidental shooting.

The legal system requires a judge and jury to find a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a person of murder. That certainly does not mean Larry is innocent. It seems you believe him innocent.

Good for you.

[TheCars1986]

Originally Posted by jets4life

The legal system requires a judge and jury to find a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to convict a person of murder. That certainly does not mean Larry is innocent. It seems you believe him innocent.

Good for you.

You quoted me:

Originally Posted by TheCars1986

In all seriousness, I will preface what I'm about to say with that I think Larry Gibson killed Tommy.

The legal system in this case required a jury to find a person guilty beyond a reasonable doubt because they believed, "A person, with criminal negligence, cause[d] the death of a child under 14 years". The jury was instructed to include 2nd degree manslaughter for a reason.

[Clockwork]

My question has more often been not so much who but how? I am not sure Larry had enough time to dispose of Tommy's body. It is like someone like Mark Fuhrman. He was used as a prop in the OJ trial as painted as a guy who framed OJ, but even if you didn't like him, there was no physical way he could have done all of that within the time frame. I question what Larry could have done as well. Did he really accidentally kill Tommy by gunshot or by hitting him and then be able to dump the body and bury it in a place where no one has found it in 32 years?

No animal dug it up, no humans were walking and saw something unusual. He would have had time to do all of this and then make his body disappear permanently? I want to see how he could do this, but I have difficulty with that.

This wasnt someone like Rob Page who obviously had plenty of time to dump Pam's body and bury it for good.