PCA Said 'Vehicle 1." Why? Part 2.
BBM Oh boy, that could open a window to the 2011-13 vs BK's 2015. Drop him off and pick him up? ....
Snipped for focus
@WildWest Previous poster asked: why did PCA use term "Vehicle 1."
Briefly, I said, because at some point in the legal proceedings --- now, at trial, or years from now --- it's possible a second vehicle might be referenced as being somehow, someway being involved.
Hoping this post better conveys my earlier thought.
In this case there may or may not ever be a Vehicle 2. But if a second vehicle is claimed to be involved, it may be clearer and easier to refer to vehicles w a number, #1, #2, etc.
The PCA's use of term "Vehicle 1" for BCK's car does not "open a window" to another vehicle dropping off or picking up BCK. Does "not open a window" to anything.
Pls re-read my post (pasted below), which did not say or imply that another vehicle or another Elantra is now known to be involved.
imo jmo moo icbw
________________________________
My EarlIer post:
Snipped for focus.
@iamnotagolem
Imo, simply allows for POSSIBILITY of LE finding/learning of another vehicle somehow being involved in the crime.
For ex., BCK borrowed friend's vehicle or rented a vehicle which he used before, during, or after crime.
Or a vehicle someone else aiding or abetting in the crimes used.
Or a vehicle that a co-conspirator used.
Holy cow, imagine how confusing it could be if two Elantras were used.
imo jmo moo icbw
