Now everyone here understands that we have no privacy when we drive down the roads. Not only are there cameras everywhere, but people taking pictures of the cameras.....
Thank you for that, BTW....
I am glad that in this day and age I have nothing to hide. It is basically impossible to completely cover your tracks and erase any and all evidence of you doing anything nowadays.
I can't help but to think about very small things that help break the case wide open. Is it likely that the Ms didn't realize there was a camera at the substation close to their house? Is it likely that they didn't know about the camera on the pillar of the gate, posted above?
If one of these two cameras (or both) provided LE with the 'video surveillance' that they are talking about, then I cant help but to thank god for small miracles.
I have a feeling If not for whatever video evidence LE has, pinpointing the Ms would have been much harder. And convicting them would be more of a challenge than the one that already presents itself.
LE obviously has a 'smoking gun' that they feel proves HE was held against her will (kidnapping) and her life was taken at the landing.
My questions are as follows:
Does the video show the Ms coming in one car, or two?
Did HE arrive at the landing before or after (one or both of) them?
The timeline (when each of them arrived, when they left, how long they were there, etc).
And most importantly, do they have any proof, one way or another, that HE left the landing? If she left the landing, I think we can all come to the conclusion that it either a) wasn't on her own free will, or b) she was already deceased.
I know most if this won't come out until trial, but the fact remains that HE is still missing. We have those responsible behind bars, and I believe LE has the evidence it needs for a conviction. I feel the most important thing at this point is locating HE.
Since the HCPD has charged them both with identical charges, I think they feel like they believe they can get a conviction for both in a court of law.
I think in this particular case, there was a leader, and a follower. Why the DP wasn't put on the table to begin with blows my mind. First of all, if this doesn't qualify as a DP case in the state of SC, then what would?
Second of all, that would be my bargaining chip as the solicitor. If I were the solicitor, my conversation would be very basic, simple, yet very stern, and to the point.
I would tell them both the same thing :
If you tell me where to find HE, maybe we can cut you a deal.
Don't tell us, and if we have to find her on our own, or god forbid, we don't find her, we *will* kill you back.
But, I am obviously not LE, and I honestly feel like they have a good reason for approaching it the way they are.
I just want HE home...
-Restless in Horry County
-JL
PS - Sorry for the long post that jumped from subject to subject. Because of the amount of hours I am currently working, I really only get a little bit of time to read and catch up on posts. And I have even a smaller amount of time to reply. I wanted to get all that in there.
Sent from my Verizon Galaxy S3 Running Android 4.4.2 via Tapatalk Pro 4
