HockeyMom330
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2017
- Messages
- 262
- Reaction score
- 2,144
They (LE, DC) said, they believe he might have spoke n to someone about the murder. My feeling is, they got a “tip” from that someone, but the person who tipped them is not willing to testify (for understandable reasons). Then the LEOs rushed to look at the initial interviews, and (Lord!) noticed the car that they might have forgotten about (I honestly think they forgot about own scanner info). So now they either need a witness who would independently place this person on the bridge around the time of murders, or someone who is close to him crack up and shell out the information, or something else that would be a proof.
Because what they heard from someone BG confided in is not direct information, DNA buried in 20+ others is good but not enough, so they need something more direct.
This, or something like this.
I think the tip, if there was one as you state, was likely anonymous (but for some reason very credible). The PC was directed in part at this person, hoping their conscience would crack and they would come forward (LE begged for them to trust). I do think the vehicle increased in significance after reviewing their initial interviews. I don't think they forgot about it, so much as dismissed it or cleared the owner(s) based on a false alibi. That's why they need information about the driver of the vehicle, in order to place their POI at or near the scene of the crime in the time frame of the crime to unravel their alibi.