In reflecting on the fact that there were over 20 stab wounds, one wonders how the killer was able to sanitize the crime scene in the darkness of night so thoroughly that three days of searching the park and trained dogs failed to locate any forensic evidence.
In reflecting on the fact that there were over 20 stab wounds, one wonders how the killer was able to sanitize the crime scene in the darkness of night so thoroughly that three days of searching the park and trained dogs failed to locate any forensic evidence.
How does one get rid of all evidence of a rage killing in the dark in an area surrounded by dirt, plants and trees?
One possible explanation is that the killer did strangle/suffocate to kill and, in an attempt to cover-up a crime of passion, stabbed the remains 20 times after death in the location that the remains were concealed. Since one's blood doesn't flow after death, the blood spatter which typically occurs from 20 stab wounds would not occur in any significant way.
Just my thoughts, I'm likely wrong.
Maybe there WAS blood in the park - but didn't it rain?? So the blood gets swept away by rain.
Let's see - only 2 hours and 10 minutes to go for 9am Pacific time?
Edited to add: if Gitana or anyone else in the area is going - I noticed they are letting reporters in - you can say you are a reporter from Websleuths!
LE will act accordingly with the evidence they have.
My doubts about the viability of our shared explanation is that logically it doesn't make sense -- remaining at the crime scene a second longer than one needs to increases one's chances of getting caught by someone and I doubt that the killer knew enough about how the body works to understand that the splatter and spurting would be incredibly minimal or non existent. That being said, there's no logic in the act of killing...
The victim knowingly and purposefully outing the man charged with his murder tends to negate this being prosecuted as a hate crime.
