This is worth repeating:I for one think it doesn't so much matter (to Tecia) whether or not she in fact went into the Play It Again Sports, as it does "whether or not the Play It Again Sports was en route to her final destination/something she drove past and didn't in fact enter".
In short, she needs the presence of the Play It Again Sports on her route to explain away both (1), the self-admitted route pings; (2), her odd decision not to go to one of the three Petcos closer to their house instead.
Agreed, but in all likelihood the divorce case will settle before the murder trial begins. So technically she would be accused, but innocent until proven guilty.I think her killing his child would be more than enough.
With cameras being a thing now, I’m really hoping the whole case against TS will be on camera, one CCTV at a time.My exact thoughts. They will have nearly every move mapped.
I agree. I think they will have a very detailed map of her actions. Reminds me of the Michelle Le murder and how through the detail was of her murderers movements.
Wrong model in the pic- she rented a sedan. Which is typical in a vin search.
Sure.Legally she hasn't done that. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.
JMO
Where in a PetCo store could you stash/hide something and feel confident it wouldn't be found during hours of other shoppers' and stockers'/staff' activity? The only way the scenario works for me is if she actually left her phone/watch in the car and someone else came to meet her there and she transferred to a different car. That would allow her to say she was in that area shopping for two hours, starting at PetCo and stopping back there before leaving. But that would mean another person's involvement and I don't really think that's the case.
My state allows for emergency spousal support filing - I know we discussed the divorce in a prior thread and someone posted CO statutes - I’m sure this will be litigated in the courts -Of course. I wasn't suggesting he should be at all indebted to her, but I wasn't sure if he legally could be forced to provide her with any support now, during, or after the divorce. I know he said he wasn't offering any in the filing, but legalities aren't always what we think should happen. I mostly was asking if others had witnessed how this plays out in other cases or if a lawyer knew legally how it works. Could AS be legally required to provide her money for a defense(if she didn't want a PD) or for commissary? I certainly hope not, but again sometimes legalities make no sense.
add 10 minutes visits to each store she allegedly visited...if she visited any.. gives us about an hour to spare?
Thanks for doing that Statt.
Brain freeze.. I thought it was much tighter..
not gonna help much, is it?
Damnit!
has a transcript of the phonecall been posted?
Gah. I hope the courts wouldn’t do that to him. I think of AS often. I have an acquaintance who dated Koelhepp (sp?). I can only imagine all the second guessing running through your head.Of course. I wasn't suggesting he should be at all indebted to her, but I wasn't sure if he legally could be forced to provide her with any support now, during, or after the divorce. I know he said he wasn't offering any in the filing, but legalities aren't always what we think should happen. I mostly was asking if others had witnessed how this plays out in other cases or if a lawyer knew legally how it works. Could AS be legally required to provide her money for a defense(if she didn't want a PD) or for commissary? I certainly hope not, but again sometimes legalities make no sense.
This is worth repeating:
"In short, she needs the presence of the Play It Again Sports on her route to explain away both (1), the self-admitted route pings; (2), her odd decision not to go to one of the three Petcos closer to their house instead."
But, a judge can use his common sense and place the matter on hold till trial ends. This is the killing of a child.Agreed, but in all likelihood the divorce case will settle before the murder trial begins. So technically she would be accused, but innocent until proven guilty.
Interesting question though, could or would a judge award support? I'm in California, home of the weird, outlandish legal rulings![]()
Is she present at the divorce hearing, because HER HEAD IS GOING TO EXPLODE!!! She'll go from 0-60 in no time flat and will rant about how much she's done for AS & his family and how it's everyone else's fault.
Seriously, she needs to have those handcuffs triple checked for tightness that day!![]()
"She may have known how to injure him without leaving bruises."I wondered about that too, people want to believe the best about their spouse, and TS was likely pretty convincing. She may have known how to injure him without leaving bruises so AS would think GS was exaggerating. Whatever she did to injure him on Sunday, however, crossed the line, and she knew she couldn't cover it up.
I've pondered what type of injury she could have inflicted, and it might have been some type of mesenteric injury -- similar to the type caused by seatbelts in an accident that injure the bowel from inside, causing rectal bleeding. He wouldn't have been able to control it and may have expelled blood in a puddle on the floor. That could have happened if she kicked him forcefully in the abdomen. All speculation, though.
I just hope they find his body while there is still time to discover exactly what she did to him.