I guess since i haven't posted most of this week since the defence rested i will give my opinion. I wish the defence would have given a solid reason for the events in MR version but i guess we will have to hear final closings to know MR version summed up
I think they charged him wrong and should have and probably will if found anything but guilty but i think 100% guilty of at least accessory after the fact, cover up and hendering a investigation ( those charges i believe he is guilty and should be charged accordingly )
I believe there is reasonable doubt on the "charges". Charges not so much the crime. He is guilty but i think there is enough doubt to say its possible he did not do some of the things being charged
we have seen much more then the jury has seen as we have sleuthed so much that we are able to see the bigger picture sometimes, So im trying ( doesn't always work ) to look at this case without thinking to much on the rumours and the scenarios others have thrown out as the jury should not be swayed from it.
With the videos we have of MR and TLM of that day and after all show him calm cool and collective and nothing saying "panic or worried" as someone with a kidnapped child in the car. Windows down, HD stop, timmy stop, ATM stop ect.
to me that's a key point, it gives me reason to think that maybe up till a much later time ( could be 30 mins could be 2 hours) MR did not know that Tori was in that car against her will. Now is where i have to speculate as to why she would be in that car and as a parent and like so many others here, a child who is abducted is usually done so for sexual purposes.
BUT i do not see how the crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that MR "KNEW" he was in the process of kidnapping Tori when TLM approached the car, I believe that she walked as seen in the video calmly and carefree with Tori in tow willingly at that point. What point Tori knew she was abducted we probably will really never know as we only have TLM words as to what was said to Tori to make her go willing. But the question of kidnapping would have to be "When was it known to MR" before, during or after, What do we have that says he knew he was kidnapping Tori?
Forensic Evidence was inconclusive to rape, the only direct link is the semen mixed with a very tiny spot of Tori's blood on the car door frame BUT there is enough doubt that the semen could have been deposited at a previous time and her blood ended up dropping onto one of the many spots of semen inside that car ( How many spots did they find ?? More then the one from all the sexual encounters with the other woman in the car testified in court)
The blood and semen can be from raping Tori but it could be just as likely that since it was testified that MR had sex on multiple occasions in that car that it is possible that the blood was transferred from another method other then rape ( the bag, TLM hands ect) .
I wish we had the answer to why any child is killed, but in the end only the person committing the crime can tell us their state of mind for doing it.
I hear you, and can see why most feel that Tori was raped and I as a parent tend to think the only reason a child is kidnapped is for sexual purposes but this doesn't mean that is the case and the evidence needs to show that it actually happened.
In the end my opinion is he should spend quite a number of years in prison reflecting on his actions that day, I believe he will serve the 25 years at least and I believe that in the end justice will be served for Tori