BeanE
Inactive
I dunno, w/o a body, and murder evidence, can they just charge her with murder?
They can and will if and when the DA feels confident of a conviction.
My thought was this, was this detective in love with her and wanted to help her go free by intentionally violating these rules? I can't imagine WHY else on earth he'd do this, given he's in LE. Did he really mean it that he's her "friend" and wanted to help her, and this is how he is going to help her get out
ummmm... no. Just... no. Detective Salame is from SAPD. SAPD believes Elizabeth murdered Gabe. If homicide charges are brought, they will be brought by San Antonio, the jurisdiction in which they believe she killed him. Note Chief McManus' comment in the WOAI video interview in which he says that Salame thought it was okay to interview her because it was in regards to the San Antonio charges (homicide), versus the Tempe charges (kidnapping etc).
Also, even if the detective did violate certain rules, WHY would this end in EJ's kidnapping charges being dropped? Did she NOT kidnap Gabrile and possibly kill him? I mean, why does GABRIEL end up paying for it when the detective made a legal error? Why does Elizabeth go FREE if the detective made a legal error? Punish the detective or void the evidence from the interview?
It is SO bizarre to me that this would be a possible outcome.
would someone please explain WHY an error of the detective, would result in EJ being freed and GABRIEL getting no justice for being missing or dead? Why does the detective's mistake make EJ's actions OKAY?
1 more thing - I wonder WHY is this coming out only now? i remember a while back, when EJ wanted to fire Alcock, she said that her grandma had paid them 50k (?) or something because they promised they'd get her off on a procedural error but that never happened. i guess this is what she is talking about... i don't recall where i saw it, does anyone have the link? Is this Alcock's strategy to protect his own reputation, or a timed attempt to save EJ after the insanity plea did not work out?
Also, even if the detective did violate certain rules, WHY would this end in EJ's kidnapping charges being dropped? Did she NOT kidnap Gabrile and possibly kill him? I mean, why does GABRIEL end up paying for it when the detective made a legal error? Why does Elizabeth go FREE if the detective made a legal error? Punish the detective or void the evidence from the interview?
It is SO bizarre to me that this would be a possible outcome.
would someone please explain WHY an error of the detective, would result in EJ being freed and GABRIEL getting no justice for being missing or dead? Why does the detective's mistake make EJ's actions OKAY?
AZlawyer could explain it better than I could, but it is because it was a violation of her constitutional rights if the detective interviewed her about any of her current charges without her attorney present. He knew she had an attorney. He knew he could not interview her about those charges without her attorney present.
Based on McManus' comment, if Salame interviewed her *only* in regard to San Antonio charges, specifically homicide, then there *may* be a chance her current charges wouldn't be dropped. I'm not confident of this though, because the charges are so closely related.
1 more thing - I wonder WHY is this coming out only now?
It was reported in MSM some time ago.