girlhasnoname
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2018
- Messages
- 9,720
- Reaction score
- 123,430
RA had from the first reinterview on Oct 13th, 2022 until the second on Oct 26th arrest to dispose of any highly incriminating things in his possession. He knew then that he was on LE's radar so it would seem highly likely for him to have gotten rid of small thumb drives, old phones, or any trophies he might have taken from the scene, or which connected him to it.I went back and reread TLi's search affidavit for RA's property. There's something disturbing in there that is an echo from RL's search affidavit about how in the investigator's experience, this type of crime would be memorialized through digital photos/videos, or other digital means, during and after the crime.
IMO, a lot of what is written, spoken through the PCs, and interview techniques could be stemming from the FBI BAU's profiling of the suspect, including this digital memorialization idea.
My question is, what the hell was at that CS to give this impression?
I'm very curious if the State will present any kind of digital evidence that will prove this seemingly key concept. If RA is guilty yet spoke to LE, kept his same clothing/car/weapon/phone, etc., then would we not expect him to also have kept this deeply psychological connection (digital memorialization) as was predicted by the FBI and TLi? The D says there's no digital evidence connecting RA to the girls or the CS, which I understand a lot of people disregard since it comes from the D, but I'm not so willing to dismiss it without knowing the evidence. That's why I'm really curious about this detail, and if LE got it right.
*Also of note, in this document, TLi states the girl witness described him as no taller than 5'10", bigger build, and that she came up to his shoulder.
DocumentCloud
RA could have carried these types of things piece by piece and disposed of them anywhere in town or any garbage can. Maybe a CVS garbage can or McDonalds where the trash is emptied on a frequent basis.
MOO