I understand where you are coming from and there is no doubt LE made mistakes early in this investigation but I don’t know, there has been so much work and pressure and commitment to get it right in the end that I can’t believe that they’d go forward with RA if they weren’t pretty much certain and had their case air tight.
Murder Sheet has a podcast up about the document. I believe it's legit.
art19.com
The memorandum brought up some questions regarding "muddy and bloody" and the one who claimed she saw him on the bridge. Also the hours claimed that he spent there. Also what likely went wrong with the RA interview with the conservation officer.
This is a really, really tough case. The way those children were slaughtered (allegedly), can only compare in magnitude to the LaBianca / Tate murders. Truly depraved and evil beyond most people's ability to comprehend. Let society now serve up legal justice, and give these families a small measure of closure.
I don't think the PCA for RA was supposed to go into details about the crime scene though. They were just establishing probably cause and they did that without sharing all these details the defense has now made public. They can share all this and try to make some other story fit, but that doesn't mean that a version where their client is the killer doesn't exist also. Just because the PCA didn't explain exactly how he committed the crime, doesn't mean he didn't do it. The defense can make up whatever version they want, but it doesn't make it true.
I don’t see the link anywhere in that article. Does anyone have a direct link to the memorandum?If you missed reading this memorandum before it was taken down and really want to read it, it is included in this article…I’ll pass…
Allen's defense: Libby and Abby killed in Odinism ritual sacrifice
"Members of a pagan Norse religion, called Odinism ... ritualistically sacrificed Abigail Williams and Liberty German," the motion states.www.jconline.com
It looks like they edited it out at 8:10 pm. You just missed it.
Click on the headline
Exactly
I thought the 2 bra thing was weird and dressing one in the other's clothing.
I found it. So people are thinking someone went through the time and effort to make this whole thing up? If true that is seriously messed up
Yeah, that part struck me, too. And yes, they did say jeans, I think. Also, the PCA said L's phone was under L, while this says it was under A.
As I am reading the document, I just keep thinking this is so ridiculous.. it is so over the top the way it's worded, it isn't believable. IF the defense had solid evidence that LE planted evidence, ignored solid suspects (as in those that didn't have a solid alibi somewhere else that day) and it was all hidden to frame a man they didn't even know existed until just before he was arrested?? WHY and why write this elaborately detailed story like this? It was nearly 100 steps written out that this single man would have had to do. It was like they were exaggerating to make it sound so drawn out, but it really isn't and wouldn't be as difficult as they made it sound. It just sounds like they are trying make something out of nothing. Solid evidence would speak for itself without the need for 132 pages of colorful over embellishing of all this.
How did he re-dress A without getting her clothes dirty?
