TTF14
On Time Out
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2014
- Messages
- 15,837
- Reaction score
- 73,350
I went back a THIRD time to listen to 48:25 through 52:00 of the video. You see, on the second pass I thought I heard something a little different from what I remembered and reported here after the first pass. It keeps happening.
I had reported here that caller thought perhaps Libby's state of undress was from dragging. (Police have not confirmed if either or both were clothed, nude, partial, or whatever, never mind how they got that way.)
The caller is in fact referring to a rumor that dragging had removed clothing. He is not endorsing it at all. Before addressing the likelihood of this, he skips to another rumor, that one or both girls were sexually assaulted. This he addresses, saying that he has not heard they were assaulted.
He then cites a non-public LE-developed profile of the killer where they say some stand-offish, non-touching but still sexual behavior occurred. LE could not believe [exaggerated emphasis by caller] there was no DNA. This citing of LE's belief in a sexual motive seems intended in part to rebut, not assert, the rumor about dragging. However, it occurs so far after the mention of it that I'm still not sure. Caller mentions the killer perhaps using a condom from a distance. This IMHO appears to be him giving an example from his own mind of what LE could be referring to, not a quote from the profile.
I keep having to correct my first report. The caller's presentation is vague and ambiguous. <modsnip>
THANK YOU!
smh