Linda7NJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 32,110
- Reaction score
- 8,279
Yet she does all that and does not flush the toilet, leaving clear DNA evidence of her supposed co conspirator? And she also fails to clean up the clearly visible bloody shoeprints of RG? I think people attribute too much to AK.
Police also led her to PL. they were asking about him. Even if you believe her to be guilty, I think claims there was some grand conspiracy on her part to frame PL is a bit much. I don't think she is that stupid. She knew PL ran a bar, she would have known unless she was stupid there was a pretty good chance he would have a rock solid alibi. Plus none of the DNA evidence would have matched PL.
It would be pretty stupid to frame someone who 1 ) you knew they had an alibi; and 2) (assuming you believe her guilty) you knew they had no DNA or fingerprints at the crime
Moreover, what would be the purpose? To buy more time for RG to run away? It does not make any sense. If you believe her guilty, she knew what the evidence would show. It would be a matter of time before it led straight to RG, especially since he was a local who was friends w the guys downstairs. Eventually evidence would have led straight to him so why frame an innocent person? It makes no sense.
Unfortunately we will never know what went on in that interrogation room. The fact that nothing was taped is very suspicious IMO.
No one has claimed she's some sort of genius! She's not. She was caught and found guilty twice.
That interview wasn't used against her anyway. It's irrelevant. She came up with ever changing versions later.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk