FullDisclosure
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 561
- Reaction score
- 0
My impression when I viewed the dump area is that:
1. This was a quick 'dump and run.'
2. There are absolutely no lights back there so he wouldn't have seen the foliage in detail in which to better 'hide' her. My impression in looking around is that he thought this would be isolated 'enough.'
3. I do not believe he intended for her to be found quickly--if that were the case he could have dropped her body much closer to the developments that are already built on Fielding. She was wayyyyy in the back...lots have not been sold there yet. It's extremely isolated.
4. I believe it was divine intervention that a jogger just happened to go down that particular new subdivision cut that day.
5. I do not believe he intended or planned to ever come back to that dump site and certainly would not attempt to move her (decomposing) body to a 'better' location. I think he thought this was good and isolated and she would not be found anytime soon. And it *is* isolated.
6. I think she was dumped there around 4am that Sat. morning and then he went to HT (IF the time of his first HT visit is verified to be 4:20am). I think it was absolutely pitch black out when he did the dump, which is why she was left so close to the road and not carried 10 additional ft to be hidden in the thicket of shrubs & trees and grasses.
http://s48.photobucket.com/albums/f...?action=view¤t=CooperSitePanorama-1.jpg
Credit for the photo goes to Skittles--I just linked to it...but notice that there is a street lamp on the right hand side if you scroll over; it's there in the cul de sac, not too far from the dump site. So it probably wasn't completely dark. (see #2, above)
I do agree with SG, however, that the person who left Nancy there did not plan to go back and move her body.