Dotta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2021
- Messages
- 12,116
- Reaction score
- 74,013
I would think that they sweep a wide net when it comes to collecting whatever they need to while conducting the search. They don't know what's on those devices until they analyze them and that will be done in a lab I would think. The collection of those items does not in itself mean that a crime was recorded; it does mean that they are leaving no stone unturned in this investigation and are considering all possibilities. Just my own opinion.Maybe someone can answer this question I have. The warrant lists VHS tapes and cameras. Why would those have evidence if this was an accident? The flip phone could have records of calls so I got that, but seizing cameras and tapes makes it seem like this was an intentional amd recorded killing, IMOO
The words “pulled into” were not used until now. Previously they said “got into”. 2 totally different implications. So I agree that the change in verbiage is significant.I find it interesting that the warrant states she was seen being “pulled into the green car”
Was that detail kept secret from the public? I knew there was a possible association with her and the green car but I don’t recall the “pulled in” detail.
If so, it sounds like they have more information alluding to her homicide.
The words “pulled into” were not used until now. Previously they said “got into”. 2 totally different implications. So I agree that the change in verbiage is significant.
I do too. I think they used 'got into a car' originally in case someone came forward and said she got into their car. Then the police could say 'well actually....'The words “pulled into” were not used until now. Previously they said “got into”. 2 totally different implications. So I agree that the change in verbiage is significant.