I'd like to go back to the recently unsealed Search Warrant.....
I found it odd that they worded each item with
or instead of using 'and/or, as this would seem to only allow 1 of these to be retrieved no matter how many were found [Ref. Pg 3]. It only stood out to me because I know the importance of how things are worded to eliminate a variety of potential loopholes or actions, such as the word
should vs
shall in statutes or laws leaves big loopholes if should is used over shall, as one may imply a suggestion and the other is to act upon. First thing that came to mind was if the defense attorney can have some evidence declared inadmissible because
they only asked for 1, not all. I know that sounds far fetched but if I was a defense attorney up against a case like this, that's something I would want to do (if possible). In today's day and age, wording is everything. MOO
I also found it odd that the warrant showed that the wounds on KG, MM, & XK were said to be from apparent stab wounds but EC's were later determined to be caused by sharp-force injuries [Ref. Pg 2 of Exhibit A]. What does that even mean?? And why weren't his injuries 'apparent' like the others??
Another thing that has never sat well with me was BK being pulled over on August 21st at Farm Road & Pullman Hwy at 11:37 p.m when his phone pinged near the residence from 10:34 to 11:35 p.m. [Ref. Pg 17, Exhibit A]. Its approx 1.3 miles but about a 6 or 7 minute drive from the King Rd address with lots of turns. At first I just thought this was a simple matter of cell towers overlapping but, IDK, something doesn't seem right about it. MOO. Is it just me??
None of these things are keeping me awake at night or anything. They're just things I observed and figured I'd bring up to hear others input.
Ebm