Hi all. This is my first post, so please be gentle
![Smile :) :)]()
I noticed that when LA first starts discussing the laptop in his interview (page 54) he says "...actually when I got there originally it was, it was still, it was off at that point. But it was set up...It was set up, plugged in, on the kitchen countertop. Uhm, and when I turned it on so I can just try to see if I can get on the desktop there because I was curious..." Then later in the interview (page 57), the officer (Edwards) says "You said it was sitting there running on the 15th when you went to get it?" And LA answers "Exactly." Edwards says again further on about the laptop sitting there "running"--even talking about how it could have been sitting there running from the 9th to the 15th. Does it matter that LA first says he turned it on and tried to get to the desktop, but later says it was already running, and agreed that it could have been running for days? The only reason this bugs me is that I think he forgot what he had already said (that he had turned it on) which tells me he's lying. Why would he lie about it if he hadn't done anything? JMO