Confusion
Creative Spelling Expert
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2012
- Messages
- 5,275
- Reaction score
- 6,277
As usual, I can't catch up with you guys, and need to be up in the morning. Sorry if whatever it is I'm saying here has already been said.
I mentioned that earlier too. a lot of people do put their arms like that when backing up, and could miss seeing him.
MOO
BBMThank you, but this just makes it more confusing - did he back into / reverse park his car in the parking spot.
IIRC from the probable cause hearing - I heard stoddard (sp?) explain that he reversed his car then went forward into the parking spot. It's confusing to understand or to have the complete description because it's also suggested that it was explained he reversed his car into the parking spot. ???????
After hearing what has been on NG - this may be a moot point - have not yet seen it myself, and would like for the re-enactment to use the same seat with a person of same height to be on the same level for sight or obstruction of sight.
Did RH put his arm over the tops of the seats while he turned backwards which would maybe block the view of baby Cooper?
I know most will roll eyes or throw tomatoes, but these are questions I have, and this is an issue that I think is important that will help me to determine accident or murder.
my opinion and all that jazz :moo:
Even though my opinion does not count one way or the other for the outcome of this case - it's nice to know I can have one :seeya:
I mentioned that earlier too. a lot of people do put their arms like that when backing up, and could miss seeing him.
My first thought was that she was a Donna, but I really don't think we should be trying to guess her name anyway.You're not a Rue are you?
I don't consider what I do to be playing devil's advocate, I just post any new (or semi-new) thoughts I come up with on either side of the fence. Many people think that being on the fence means you believe the person is innocent, but I think of one side of the fence innocent, one side of it guilty and on top of it not totally convinced either way. As it is right now, I can believe a person innocent of murder could have valid/semi-valid reasons for pretty much everything the prosecution has come up with so far, but I do find it hard to believe they could all be true for one person. Because of that, I'm still waiting for that one item that makes it obvious to me that he is guilty or not guilty.Ah, good to hear.
You crack me up. "Playing" devil's advocate is a way to help see both sides of an issue. It's not roleplaying, nor does it preclude you from being "authentic". So, what is there to discuss if you have no doubts and you apparently don't want to hear anything that doesn't fall in line? Rehashing the sketchy details over and over without seeing things from another perspective gets old, imho.
Thank you for the welcome.
MOO