And it's obvious that there are spots further away from the store's front that also has no cameras close by.
Same here. Of course, she would have no way of knowing what would show up on a camera, since she never worked at either location.
It just makes no sense to bring your (still living) victim with you to the very place where you need to be seen to create your alibi.
Yes, this passage from the Morris book is a great example of how careless it is with the facts. It does seem obvious to me that at this point, almost a decade later, Desiree does not possess the full facts or any reasonable means to get to them.
This is false information, since from the very start, PTA president Gina Zimmerman testified to seeing Terri and Kyron in front of their project in the classroom at
8:15. This is not Morris being sloppy, but an idea Desiree seems to have gotten
years later. At first she claimed it was based on "technology" (metadata, one supposes), but that is mysteriously absent from the book.
Yet, 9:12 is the specific time given on the receipt Terri got at that location, not the time she was spotted driving away. If it was the Starbucks drivethrough I suppose they could match.
This, however, is way off. The police have been consistent in saying Terri's shopping run ended at 10:10 or 10:15. This is inconsistent with leaving at 9:40, but Morris also fudges the time Terri arrives at the gym (it was 11:39, but the book erroneously says 12:20), expanding the time Terri was driving around unwitnessed from 90 minutes to almost three hours.
The idea that the video showed her leaving at 9:40 falls flat on its face when you realize that the ones who studied the footage put out
this flier immediately after. Why on earth would they ask for sightings of the truck at 10:00 if the footage they themselves viewed showed it leaving at 9:40?
How on earth would Terri know the angles of the cameras and how to park so that they covered exactly what she wanted to show, and nothing more?
Well, I've clearly shown that this is wrong. There are places further away and they would not be deserted. Ridiculous hyperbole from Morris.
Sure, nothing is certain. But so much of this case (at least in the public perception) relies on there only being one single way of doing things ever, only one single way of thinking of things. Because if there isn't, pretty much all of Terri's actions that day are perfectly explainable.
It was interesting, reading the old threads in this forum. When Terri's reason for driving around with the baby came out, people scoffed. "Who does that? Obvious lie!" It took a few pages before commenters started speaking up. "Well, I do, actually." "It's not that uncommon." Similarly, when the photos from the FM parking lots became public (and showed Terri had been truthful about her locations) there was more scoffing: "Who would park that far away? She must have been trying to hide something!" and again it took a bit for others to chime in: "I do, especially when I drive a larger vehicle."
It takes a lot of effort and plenty of denial (and as the Morris book shows, a hefty dose of hyperbole) to make Terri's parking choices that morning suspicious.
<modsnip>
She took pictures with her phone, no? Only need one hand for that.
Well, first, that would likely depend on how long Terri was planning on staying at the school. For a whole day, a stroller might be useful, since there might be naptime involved.
But this is yet another case of there not being just one single understandable course of action.
OK, so there would be no problem putting her down for a little while? Then I see no reason a stroller had to be used.