Search results

Additionally, DS was not his boss so IF he was laid off that wouldn't have any bearing on her.

Once an arrest is made things can move quickly if the individual exercises their right to have that happen. As such, they would be entitled to discovery and once that phase of a criminal trial begins they have to have all their facts straight and charges laid out. In a case like this where...

I wouldn't think that. I would think that it aids the police in their investigation but in order to indict they need to have charges or counts laid out and fully supported in order to get a grand jury to support an arrest warrant.

An arrest warrant comes after a search warrant and needs to have specific charges attached to it. Police need to be careful in assessing those charges and at this stage without a body they may not be prepared to do so.

My posts are disappearing or I'm messing up. I wanted to state that there is no way a judge would sign off on a search warrant without proof of probable cause. Illegal search and seizure would open up the police department to costly litigation. The process is not as casual as some are making it...

Probable cause exists for a reason.

I wish they would release clear information about that. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. Why not just abandon or ditch it somewhere. Why would anybody take the risk of driving a MPs car to their home?

I do think there's a definite possibility she was friends with this individual. It's really makes the most sense and requires the least amount of assumptions.

It was to the friend she was supposed to meet for dinner. She let media photograph or screenshot her phone at Thursday's vigil.

I agree with your post and observations about the responses but I tend to read them as we can't comment on those types of details or aspects of the case. It seems like a polite way of avoiding having to repeat or make that statement because if the even imply they know things people may get...

I would think it would have to be knowingly if he had help. Otherwise, that would open him up to a lot of problems.

LE takes steps to ensure a POI is there.

Contact was made when a group of LE descended unexpectedly on his home.

Why take a mattress? This leads me to believe several possible conversations occurred when LE initially made contact with the SG.

Attorneys don't ask their clients that question. Time is always a concern and it is common to shut down talking clients. No unecessary conversation. You answer questions succinctly. Period.

I wonder how long DNA tests take?

Thanks for the book reccomendation. I'm going to check it out.

I cannot think of one case where an individual like DS was kidnapped and forced into HT. It makes no sense on numerous levels, the ability to control her being among those. She is the antithesis of a HT victim. It's likely her family has connected to this greater cause event to gain exposure for...

Talking amounts to doing the polices' work for them. He never has to talk and generally, those who remain silent don't receive the punishments of those who talk. Unless an act is completely caught on film or there is a witness to everything, then it can be difficult to prove a case.

Nobody ever has to speak To LE so he can exercise that right forever.