24Brix
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2018
- Messages
- 215
- Reaction score
- 3,707
Assuming the bike was, in fact, staged, I’ve always thought that the “staging” might be that it was intentionally damaged to suggest an accident. But I would expect forensics to be able to determine whether any damage observed was logical or not. As with blood spatter analysis and accident reconstruction, I’m betting there are things like scratches, the physics of forces needed to cause dents to rims and spokes, peddle, handlebar, and seat scuffs, the handle bars out of alignment with the wheels, etc., that would be expected in a natural accident and that a lay-person may not be able to adequately mimic when crafting their story.I just had a thought. Many of us believe that LE zeroed in on one suspect very quickly, hence the lack of good descriptions of SM, bolo’s etc. So what would make them zero in that fast?
Evidence found at the home? That might take a bit of time while awaiting forensics results.
Inconsistency in stories. That might take a bit of time while alibis were checked.
What if it had something to do with the bike? And the way it was found?
This is a question for experienced bicyclists: What are the ways a bike can be locked or prevented from riding aside from a big obvious lock/chain thingy?
If the bike was a plant, could have someone placed it where it was found not realizing it could not have been ridden?
Also, when I think about BM stopping short in his impromptu interview when describing how “the wheel was pointed...”, I was expecting him to finish with “...this way but the handle bars were pointing that way...” Something he maybe shouldn’t have known?
MOO, as always.