The interview is from 1/4/2022 and the link is in my post.
My apologies -- the first time I clicked on the link, it didn't load completely, and I didn't realize there was more to the story than what I was seeing. Thanks for letting me know!
The interview is from 1/4/2022 and the link is in my post.
My apologies -- the first time I clicked on the link, it didn't load completely, and I didn't realize there was more to the story than what I was seeing. Thanks for letting me know!
I'm astounded that there's no full sample of DNA (according to the quoted person). Not on KJ, not on Bowie, not anywhere from the crime scene?
I am wondering the same thing. Could LE have held the press conference more to scare the killer/cause a reaction than to reassure the public?Sort of interesting words used by the police. But it sounds like they are optimistic. If the killer is someone close to Katie, I wonder if that person may try to flee soon.
Vince Velasquez (the former detective that was interviewed yesterday) was one of the best homicide detectives that APD had. He was there for almost 30 years before he retired. APD still consults with him even after his retirement and I’m sure they are picking his brain trying to figure this case out. That is more than likely the reason he was discussing this case with the lead detective. He’s very, very intelligent and there is usually a well thought out plan behind everything he does.
Here's the link to the raw interview with Vince Velasquez talking about the lack of DNA and his other thoughts regarding the case.
FOX 5 Atlanta sure cut out a lot of this interview. I think it's interesting that they only pointed out the "not an intimate attack" part of this interview where he clearly states that an intimate partner can't be discounted and we won't know until the case is solved. Maybe it was the investigative team's way of giving EC a means to confess and claim insanity? Or, maybe Fox 5 wanted to paint a different picture than what CBS46 did bc CBS46 definitely made EC look guilty AF.
Yeah, but if it was someone she jilted know the past, then it wouldn’t be random. It would be a targeted kill.It's weird how I waffle back and forth on stranger vs known killer in this case. Yes, it seems unlikely a random psycho could want to erase her identity. But, on the other hand, the killer could want to erase what they "perceived" Katie to represent (a strong woman who jilted them in the past, an LGBTQ advocate, etc etc.). Heck, I've probably read too many crime/mystery novels and watched too much Scandi/Nordic noir (just watched season 2 of "Those Who Kill") to settle on a solid theory.
I think the attack was planned. The killer knew where she would be in the park. The killer may have used the Find My Phone app to pinpoint her location in the park.
Based on the medical examiner's report, the deepest injury was to the left side of her back. IMO that was the initial injury and the injury that contributed to her death. IMO, the killer first approached her from behind and stabbed her.
Based on the medical examiner's report, the knife went in to a depth of 3-3/4 inches, causing a hemothorax (bleeding in the space between her lung and the rear chest wall) and nicking her descending aorta, causing internal bleeding. That injury alone is fatal but not immediately, since the aorta wasn't severed.
The next deepest knife wound, based on the ME's report, is 2 inches. IMO, a man would've caused a lot more damage than that. Just my observation that the killer is a woman.[
Uhh this! I heard that and was like WHAT. Most people have been referring to the killer as a “him.” Or “they” Like….nearly everyone. This guy said her. Who is interviewing the detective? Is it a news anchor?I wanted to also point out that at minute 4:19, the interviewer says "SHE was stabbing..." when asking about the tattoo on KJ's back....
I thought that too, kind of, but I would be completely shocked if this was a random psychotic killing. I still believe it’s very intimate and personal. If this person was random and just mentally ill, there would be more victims. Or at least another attack of some sorts. You don’t just attack and kill one time and then all of the sudden you are better, sans a mental illness. When you’re sick like that…..people notice. And you do odd things everywhere…FOX 5 Atlanta sure cut out a lot of this interview. I think it's interesting that they only pointed out the "not an intimate attack" part of this interview where he clearly states that an intimate partner can't be discounted and we won't know until the case is solved. Maybe it was the investigative team's way of giving EC a means to confess and claim insanity? Or, maybe Fox 5 wanted to paint a different picture than what CBS46 did bc CBS46 definitely made EC look guilty AF.
Yeah, but if it was someone she jilted know the past, then it wouldn’t be random. It would be a targeted kill.
I wanted to also point out that at minute 4:19, the interviewer says "SHE was stabbing..." when asking about the tattoo on KJ's back....
I wanted to also point out that at minute 4:19, the interviewer says "SHE was stabbing..." when asking about the tattoo on KJ's back....
IDK, I heard "she was stabbed in her face and neck..."
The interviewer's audio quality was terrible, and he spoke so quickly that it was always somewhat garbled.
I wanted to also point out that at minute 4:19, the interviewer says "SHE was stabbing..." when asking about the tattoo on KJ's back....