Hi all! I am new to posting here, but have followed this case from day one. I just watched the 4 part interview with CA and am having some serious questions about what she said. I can't believe the way she is making leaps that even Superman couldn't make in trying to pin the blame on someone, anyone but KC. I can't help but wonder how these people must feel knowing now that she was blaming them in this grand conspiracy of hers. Unbelievable! Also, there was one "slip of the tongue" that I found interesting. At about 12:19 of part 3, she is talking about how the car was left at that business and states that she couldn't "collaborate" on that, but is corrected by the detective that the word was "cooberate". Hmm! Also, she starts talking about how the car was towed and that the men at the towyard said it was smelling really bad, much worse than when it had been brought in when it smelled a little. Isn't she the one that has been on tv stating that the car DID NOT smell when it was towed? "There was no odor when it was towed! No odor! Maybe someone put a dead body in it after it was towed!" Now she is telling them that it did, a little, on this tape. Then in part 4, aside from admitting that she had made false statements to get the police to her home, cuz the car and money being stolen was just a ruse to put LE into action according to CA, she states at about 12:35 that she and GA knew all the stains in that car and there were no new ones. This contradicts GA who says he saw the stain in the trunck, and even showed how he leaned in to smell it, but it was so bad he had to back up. I'm sorry if this has been discussed and I missed it, but was wondering if these things struck anyone else as odd?
ChefMom