MsFacetious
What a Kerfuffle...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 21,624
- Reaction score
- 33,041
Just because I haven't seen her pictures in this thread yet...
Was Shawn involved or just Billie?
The thing that does not make sense to me, if they were both involved ...
Why would she openly accuse him in the media now? Wouldn't she be afraid to pizz him off, not wanting him to flip and be the first to cut a deal with LE?
I'd be guessing to say that if BD tried to cut a deal now, she would be charged with something. This way she can deny anything SA says. Unless he has proof she was involved, or LE has proof, it's all hearsay on SA's part. Just the fact that neither one has been arrested after this long, tells me LE doesn't have enough evidence to arrest either one. And to know SA is a prime suspect, that bothers me he is still free if they do have evidence on him. LE doesn't need a body to arrest anyone as long as they have sufficient evidence to show someone's involvement. If SA and BD are the only two involved, no witnesses, no hard evidence, it would be pretty easy for BD to convince LE she wasn't involved and she didn't know SA did anything to Hailey. It's been over two years now and I imagine BD has worked out a scenario to distance herself from any involvement. I believe now she is saying it's possibly SA could have done something to Hailey, this is her way of admitting she knows but doesn't want to confess as she knows she will also be held accountable for withholding evidence. She's dumb but smart enough to figure this much out kwim. I'll remain hopeful the truth will catch up with them.
Talking DNA, would a sample of DNA been taken from either BD or SA, say for later use? Or would that be against protocol .
The problem LE have is that they don't have any evidence, plus there are reasonable grounds for doubt (based on what has been reported so far).
For example, there are the various phone records from SA and HDs phones which collectively make it unlikely that either SA or BD were involved in whatever happened to HD. There are the witnesses that reported seeing HD that day, which have never been refuted. There is the whole earring debacle, which creates the strong implication on multiple levels that HD visited her fathers house that day, contary to what has been claimed.
The real problem with this case is that none of the principals have anything remotely approaching credibility, and pretty much all of what various theories are built on depends on the credibility of one side or the other.
That would make for a very weak case in trial. In a trial the real facts will come out, and neither side will be able to rely on gossip in the face of that. For example, all these calls that were made, who were they made to and why. Then there is the text message, which if true suggests a very different scenario. And if that text message was really made, you can be damned sure that the recipient will be grilled exhaustively in any trial. Likewise with the earrings, if BD's claims of the X-box footage showing HD as wearing them the night before she went missing really are true. If both of those things are true, then there is a great deal of reasonable doubt.
The problem on a site like WS is that people come fixated on a "guilty party", basically because they like or dislike various characters in the story. They go by gut feeling rather than the facts of the case. The facts of the case however are what would be presented in trial, and it is those facts, such as we know them, that would make any kind of prosecution of the most popular theory extremely difficult.
Can those that followed this on facebook verify what the commenter says here?
DD - 13 hours ago.
http://www.ktxs.com/news/HAILEY-DUN...nce/-/14769632/19408954/-/b12h6y/-/index.html
I'm not even going to comment on Billie. :facepalm:
The problem LE have is that they don't have any evidence, plus there are reasonable grounds for doubt (based on what has been reported so far).
For example, there are the various phone records from SA and HDs phones which collectively make it unlikely that either SA or BD were involved in whatever happened to HD. There are the witnesses that reported seeing HD that day, which have never been refuted. There is the whole earring debacle, which creates the strong implication on multiple levels that HD visited her fathers house that day, contary to what has been claimed.
The real problem with this case is that none of the principals have anything remotely approaching credibility, and pretty much all of what various theories are built on depends on the credibility of one side or the other.
That would make for a very weak case in trial. In a trial the real facts will come out, and neither side will be able to rely on gossip in the face of that. For example, all these calls that were made, who were they made to and why. Then there is the text message, which if true suggests a very different scenario. And if that text message was really made, you can be damned sure that the recipient will be grilled exhaustively in any trial. Likewise with the earrings, if BD's claims of the X-box footage showing HD as wearing them the night before she went missing really are true. If both of those things are true, then there is a great deal of reasonable doubt.
The problem on a site like WS is that people come fixated on a "guilty party", basically because they like or dislike various characters in the story. They go by gut feeling rather than the facts of the case. The facts of the case however are what would be presented in trial, and it is those facts, such as we know them, that would make any kind of prosecution of the most popular theory extremely difficult.
snipped for brevity
Respectfully, you know this how?Or are you assuming?
I don't know what they may or may not have. If memory serves, LE hasn't provided a list to the general public entailing specific details/evidence/forensics related to this investigation.
To say the least... sheez.
However, it what they are saying is true about what was found, then I don't think dental records are going to help.
The problem on a site like WS is that people come fixated on a "guilty party", basically because they like or dislike various characters in the story. They go by gut feeling rather than the facts of the case. The facts of the case however are what would be presented in trial, and it is those facts, such as we know them, that would make any kind of prosecution of the most popular theory extremely difficult.
I do not know what to think about Billie's possible involvement now that she is hinting that SA might be guilty. I can't see him taking that, if it came to his being arrested and she WAS involved. I doubt very much he would simply take the blame and not mention her.
But then again, Billie does not seem to think ahead very well and she may regret saying she now believes he could be involved as that could make him turn on her.
On the evening of Dec. 27, Adkins and Billie Jean Dunn made two withdrawals from an ATM in Snyder totaling $140. Billie Jean said the money was used to purchase illegal narcotics from a person in Scurry County for both Adkins and herself.
To say the least... sheez.
However, it what they are saying is true about what was found, then I don't think dental records are going to help.