Please remember BD's 'not under caution' discussion with the Police on 6th November and compare it with SA's 'not under caution discussions' on the 5 & 6th of November. These tend to get overlooked in all of this. Their stories just do not add up. It is clear to anyone that something is not right.
A girl has gone missing and one of the past places she was known to have been seen, was the Avery Salvage Yard. By whom? None other than SA, who says she left and he didn't speak to her other than to hand money over. He clearly remembers the denomination of notes he handed over, but not what she looked like, despite her being out to his property over a dozen times.
This is a huge red flag to a law enforcement officer. What are they hiding? Why can they not answer simple questions. Why, without prompting, does Dassey say that he had to step out of the way on the drive to let her pass on her way out? Why does he, without prompting, say that he saw SA talking to her. He offers he was going to go and see SA when TH had gone. Then says he thought 'they ' would want to be left alone.
There are other anomalies in these tapes & transcripts, which just alert anyone with an inquisitive mind, to something not being correct. In other words, it sounds like they are lying.
Remember, there is no narrative for what has happened to her, other than that she is missing. They are trying to get to the bottom of what has happened and here are two people, clearly not with straight stories.
I would urge people to read these early interviews, whilst listening to the audio. SA flits about and at times adds needless detail, then at others, has scant recall. BD just incriminates SA because he tells a different story. Don't get me started on the headlights & tail lights they both say they saw, (then Brendan retracts that and says he didn't.) They are trying to suggest that someone could have been on their property up to no good. (I was say the inference is that they are suggesting this is the time the Rav4 was planted.)
I have read all the transcripts & documents surrounding this case, and watched all the interviews. IMHO, SA is guilty and BD is too.
For those that think this was all a set up, from a multitude of different LE, Prosecutors, Judges, forensics, FBI etc. in differing counties, think what a better job they could have done than just a bit of smeared blood & DNA. They would have hosepiped the stuff all over the car & garage. And in SA's trailer.
Here we had a classic case of two people, telling differing stories about their recollections of a day a girl is last seen on Halloween - a memorable day - a week earlier. I am going to work on the presumption they are both innocent. You would think that given the magnitude of this, and given they are innocent, they are going to clearly remember the day as they do not want to be dragged into it. They don't exactly help themselves and then the vehicle is found on the property. It is clear something is not right.
Those first interviews are damning. They are both inconsistent and misleading. That alone does not point to guilt, but it certainly is something that sparks an inquisitive mind, into digging deeper.
Not the most popular of opinions I know, but it is mine and I respect anyone else's.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/police-interviews-and-interrogations/
Those barrel's are a pain to track, I tried once and gave up, and there have been a few really good posts on reddit trying to track them as well.... all have been unsuccessful as far as I know.
