I have been thinking a lot about why nobody could recall more about the suspect vehicle and what that might tell us about the killer.
The description given by police was presumably one that was generic enough to represent numerous eyewitness accounts identifying the subject vehicle. The police described the car as being a dark colored SUV. To me this description indicates that most likely multiple witness accounts of the car did not agree on a color. Perhaps someone said they saw a blue SUV and someone else said they thought it was black, leaving the police with no option but to classify it as dark so as to be sure not to exclude the correct color. Beyond the color we don't know anything about this SUV. And to me that says that the multiple witnesses that saw it did not mention any other incidental characteristics of it They did not mention if it was old or new they did not mention if it was beat up or damaged they did not mention if it had any memorable stickers or out-of-state license plates. To me this indicates that the subject car lacked any of these characteristics which might set it apart from the average vehicle. If the car had been really beat up or old I would expect someone to remember that characteristic at least as much as they remembered the color of it. Based on these facts I suspect that the subject SUV is neither brand-new nor significantly old or damaged. From a Socio economic standpoint this would point toward someone with a job. and not to get too profile-y, I don't think this was the vehicle of an undocumented worker. I live in farm country and I could pick an undocumented workers car out of a lineup nine out of 10 times. I don't mean this as a knock on them. I simply am observing that people who are not of great financial means or who have great financial stresses or who have family outside of the US to whom they send most of their money Are not frivolous in their spending. This type of workers typically drive smaller vehicles that are better on gas and typically these vehicles are older.
someone driving an SUV is not concerned about the day-to-day additional expenses incurred by driving an SUV that uses twice as much gas as a smaller car. They are also not concerned about the additional maintenance costs associated with owning and fixing SUVs.
Specific to this case, we have a Hispanic perpetrator and therefore we are very likely have a perpetrator who was not from town based on the demographics of the town. That means this person was traveling around in their SUV. If this was the same person or people involved in Westborough they are covering some ground Further evidence to demonstrate that this is not someone who is completely broke or not working
Snipped:
Based on these facts I suspect that the subject SUV is neither brand-new nor significantly old or damaged
Do you think perhaps the same person that said it was blue, said it was new,and the person that said it was black, said it was older?
If not, why?
If, in your scenario this guy works, but doesn't work nights, and is out attacking people at 10:30 am on a Thursday, doesn't work days, then when does he work?
To me, it's hard to accept your scenario as fact. For instance..
The SUV may not have had the dealer sticker on it, but it could have been a year old.
I know people that have 20 year old vehicles that look brand new.
Warren Buffet drives cars that are 15 years old.
There was an old post here, where someone said because VM's parents lived in a ranch style house, they didn't have much money, even though VM went to Bancroft. Maybe they invested their money in her education, rather than a larger house?
The point is, what someone drives, or the style of house they live in, doesn't always reveal their economic status.
I have to agree with Fred. (welcome btw) There is no evidence that this person was unemployed or not. What if the SUV was borrowed?
