I haven't been on this thread in a while and have been trying to get caught up. I think you make some good points, especially about the landlord. Even when SS made side trips, she probably kept the room reserved since she paid in advance for 13 days. Her family was expecting her to check out on the 21st. It is suspicious that the LL wasn't concerned when she didn't check out at that time.
If the LL thought that SS was single, I doubt she told him that but I think rather he assumed it. Suggests that they didn't talk very much which, on one hand, would explain why he didn't question why SS didn't return to the hostel on the 21st, and he may not have even been aware in advance of her plans to take side trips. So, it could be that she kept to herself and he stayed out of her business. If he is single (I don't remember if he is; I do remember that the man SS stayed with in Amsterdam is married, and she stayed with both him and his wife) and he assumed that SS was single because she was traveling alone, then there's a possibility that the LL had designs on SS that she let him know weren't welcome, and the misunderstanding (to put it mildly) led to a set-up that ended in a violent struggle. I know I've likely missed something, and apparently LE is suppressing much, but was the hostel - and the LL's dwelling - searched by LE for signs of blood? Was surveillance footage along the route that SS took the morning of the 21st reviewed for the LL's or his vehicle's presence?
That leads me to T, whom I also find suspicious. Okay, weeks ago he claimed that he and SS had a sexual relationship; now he says they had no romantic involvement at all - they were just friends (
http://english.sabah.com.tr/Nationa...ailed-to-meet-up-with-missing-american-mother). How does he make such a quick and complete turn-around? When T made the previous statements, I suspected he was preparing a defense because he well expected his DNA to be found on SS's body. I wonder if there's a connection between T and the LL, and even Z for that matter.
I do believe that more than one person was involved in the assault and coverup. At first, I believed that SS had stumbled across some illicit business when she arrived early for her meet-up with T, and because SS was taking pictures with her phone, the criminals thought she had taken pictures of them. So, the violent struggle may have been over the phone. If T and/or the LL were involved, or someone else altogether, I think Z is probably a secondary player in SS's murder. He may have been present during the murder, and the perps offered him money to hide the body. Maybe he was the one who dragged her body to a cave and wrapped his blanket around her. Maybe he suffered the scratches on his arms while moving the body and that accounts for blood matching his DNA being found on SS's shirt. Then, Z got scared and fled when he was informed that the perps were setting him up to take the rap for them. If Z was the actual murderer, wouldn't he have done a better job of hiding the body, and even fled the area much sooner?
Again, I've probably missed a lot since I last read here, so I welcome any feedback on the ideas and questions above. I can't find many articles written in English, but I'm grateful for those who went to the trouble of translating Turkish articles into English.
:moo:
You make several good points and pose a lot of the same questions that many on this board wondered about, many of which, unfortunately, haven't yet been fully addressed by the LE.
Yes, T was pretty much the number #1 suspect here on the board until Z came along for the reason that he was suspected to be the last to see her and he kept changing his story.
A few days after she went missing, the newspapers reported that T was contacted by her husband. T presumably told her husband he had missed her text and didn't meet up with her on the 21st. But of course he had sent her a text inquiring about her having wireless.
Once her body was found, T reportedly put himself in the spotlight again by saying he had sex with her on the night of the 20th, which agrees with your point of preparing a defense. Once the DNA excluded him, he then did an about face saying through his lawyer that they were not close, not romantic, in fact had only shared Tea, not T.
I don't know if they thoroughly checked LL's and T's apartments and computers for clues as they were not considered suspects (at least the LL wasn't, according to him) and I think they both got lawyers fairly quickly, as anyone would. Her bags were kept by the LL in the apartment until after her body was discovered. I would assume that at that time they did search, as they removed her bags, but I don't know. There hasn't been any evidence suggesting LL was involved, so he may simply be unjustifiably entangled in a mess he had no part of, except that he may have been one of the last to see her, so it's logical he should have been investigated, if only to rule him out. Especially as Amsterdam guy presumably alluded to SS being uncomfortable around him, or something to that effect. Though LL may have just been annoyed at her for changing her dates and cutting her trip short after she arrived, thus keeping him from renting it out to another.
Regarding T, I think sometimes what people
don't do is as telling as what they
do do.
For instance, if SS and T were IG pals for 4 months, as stated early in the investigation, and then he meets up with her in Istanbul, even if only to show her around, and if she was with him the night of the 20th, as he claimed, and they planned to see the Galata bridge together the next day and he missed her text and never saw her, well, what does he do next?
Or not do?
Wouldn't a normal person who missed a meeting with a friend on their last day in town, (especially if he'd been intimate the night before, as he originally claimed) send a few more texts? Like, 'Hey, where are you?' or 'Haven't heard from you, are you OK.. or mad?' or 'Sorry I missed your texts..Did you make your plane, buy that souvenir, capture that shot, etc? I hope you had a nice trip.' Where are you?' Or did he stop by her house that very night to check on her? Wasn't he concerned at the sudden silence on her part?
Maybe he did do all that, but it's not been reported. If he didn't do any of that, then I'd be suspicious.
And when she disappeared the night before checkout and never returned, did the LL at some point have the lock to his rental apartment changed? That's the first thing I'd do. They never mentioned that he knew T, so I can't help with that. I don't think T or LL are married, or that would have been mentioned, I assume. Maybe someone else knows. You say you don't think she told LL she was single. I agree. However LL did tell the press that she told him she was single, a remark which I found curious, considering he has said so little else about her or the case.
Like you, I find circumstances surrounding 'Z' to be somewhat baffling. I also recall reading that Z did not flee until 3 days after she either went missing or after her body was found. I can't remember, but maybe you or someone else does.As you suggest, wouldn't a murdering vagrant flee his cave as soon as he killed a person, especially after he wrapped his blanket around her (seriously- who does that?) and dragged her 100 feet to another cave?
But why stick around at all? And why then tell family or friends that someone warned you that a crime in Istanbul was going to be blamed on you by the police. Wouldn't it make more sense to keep your mouth shut and act like you hadn't even been in Istanbul or at least try to find someone to alibi you for those days? The guy doesn't seem too clever. You mentioned the scratches. I think another vagrant said he had them. I recall that his friend from home said he saw no scratches on him.
It was reported that the Le said 100% it was his DNA on her shirt. As one poster recently pointed out, 100% is a number usually used to rule out the DNA of an individual.
But they have Z's DNA matching, what? a drop of blood on her shirt, I think. Hopefully they found more than that. Wasn't there blood found covering a wall in a cave? Sounds brutal. I doubt there was a sink around the cave for washing. Is that why her coat was taken? What about the nail cuttings? Any DNA there?
Another point being they didn't have Z in their custody to get proper DNA. Not even a cigarette butt or coffee cup he drank out of. They had a hair on a pillow, or a hair from a family member at a house far from the scene. That's very helpful, but not conclusive, as the hair could belong to anyone in the family.
I think they only looked for SS in surveillance, but not sure. The girl wearing sunglasses on the CCTV: They presume it's her. But the image is too grainy for absolute identification. Posters pointed out that the jacket worn by the girl on the image had something shiny on it (like an emblem) and other images of SS's jacket didn't show anything shiny. Also, it looked like a different purse, worn on the opposite shoulder, and there was a question about the hair length of the woman and the flared pants.
Did the forensics team photograph and/or show the clothing SS was found in to her husband? According to his interview in the Staten Island Advance, her devastated spouse had to make an identification based on her pedicure.
One poster brought up the point: What was the husband advised to bring with him? Hopefully dental records and fingerprints considering the facial injuries made her unidentifiable. I'm certainly not implying at all that it wasn't her body, just that, in such a high profile case, they should be extremely thorough, which should include identifying the outfit she was found in, including her shoes and of course the shirt which presumably had the blood, as definitely belonging to her. Were the tags from an American store? The family would likely know where she shopped. Or not? It's just helpful to know. Clearly, if the girl on the image was not her, or there were serious doubts, then SS might have arrived at the spot by vehicle or another means, at a different time or another day, and by a different hand.
If they assume that they will eventually find Z alive and take him to trial, such evidence seems necessary. Even commenters in the Turkish press seem to doubt this was all Z, or even him at all.
Maybe they will catch Z and he will give them more information. Maybe he will confess and all the speculation will cease. But if that doesn't happen, hopefully the questions you and other posters have brought up, and which I am surmising here, will be answered.
Haven't got high hopes on any of that, though. It's looking to me like a rush to judgement and I fear they might want to close it as quickly as possible. IMO
