Well, then he might have a problem because anyone that can pull into a parking lot, back up, then pull into their parking space, turn off the vehicle, pick up their briefcase and a drink from the console, exit that vehicle all in 15 seconds must be superman. That's point one. His point of internet sites that just came up in a feed somewhere is also a feeble excuse. If you see it in your feed, you don't view it unless you click on the link. That's the choice of the user. He had to have clicked on those sites to view them. That's point two. If he had actually planned to go on vacation with the families, where's the documentation on that? It's just heresay. If this brother knew him (RH) half as much as he thinks he does, this wouldn't even be happening right now. To be so preoccupied with your personal addiction that you forget your child under these circumstances is criminal, proof of premeditation or not. SMH that the benefit of the doubt is being given to the accused because of an "interview" from his brother. It holds no water IMO.
