Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
IMO: Angry, inebriated, sexually frustrated, substance abusers make dumb, careless mistakes.
Agreed, the coworker told LE he noticed what looked like a bite mark on EA's arm.
Was it determined what clothing Sprint employees wear at work?
Are they required to wear short sleeved polo type shirts?
Because, why would EA be so brazen about showing off his wounds if one of them was a bite mark from a woman who he knew would surely be reported missing sooner rather than later.
The employee would have observed the bite mark on Saturday, August 30. The bite mark would be fresh on that day (if really a bite mark from Christina). LE went to the Sprint location on Wednesday, September 3, or later.
Would evidence of a bite mark still be visible after so many days?
When it comes to trial, they'll need to present more evidence than "I think I noticed a bite mark" testimony.
The problem I'm having is accepting just how dumb or careless EA's actions were if he is solely responsible for Christina's disappearance and demise.
IMO: Angry, inebriated, sexually frustrated, substance abusers make dumb, careless mistakes.
Don't you think that the rags have already been tested for dna? I think they were discovered in trash pull on 9/24???
Somehow you inserted the same sentence as your reply into the middle of my post. Looks as if I posted the comment first. Since the post is several hours old, it can't be changed.
Anyway, your comment may apply to some drug users. Back in the seventies, I knew people who used drugs but afaik violence toward another person never took place. So, until we know more, I don't think we can draw the conclusion drugs are to blame. Actually there are some very intelligent people who have fallen into the hole of using drugs. Sometimes they have a genetic predisposition to addiction. Therefore, I don't think we can automatically blame drugs and drinking for whatever happened yet.
Additionally, we are assuming he was sexually frustrated. Why would he attack his supposedly good friend's ex sexually anyway? First, HF takes his good friend's ex away from his friend(AP) and, now, another man kidnaps and harms the ex's ex? On top of being unusually boundary insensitive, isn't it downright uncanny?
Someone posted about the love triangle and Tilley referred to a former circumstance LE was looking into to determine if it could have to do with Christina's disappearance.
Someone made it a point to post that EA became the ex's good friend after HF lost the title.
Even if being under the influence led EA to attack Christina, the way EA lied in front of the media by using verifiable facts, indicates he's missing a few brain cells imo. He lied to LE about his actions when, it is obvious to most people, there are ways to verify if what he said is true or not.
Not offended at all. Just giving my thoughts. Anyone who is easily offended should probably not be posting on a forum like this!
Cm probably thought ea was harmless. Just a guy out looking for fun. I think his actions totally took her by surprise. Something like this happened to me once,and in an instant I was terrified of the guy I was dining with. Wow, I am lucky I made it home that night.
OK, well, if that's the reasoning behind that line of questioning, then I'll just ignore and scroll on, since we were instructed by WS mods not to discuss HF as being a suspect in the case at this time.
One other quick note: I believe someone mentioned (yesterday? not sure) that Jonni loved buying gifts like the purses and stylish clothing for Christina. Surely no one would begrudge her accepting gifts from her mother...
Not offended at all. Just giving my thoughts. Anyone who is easily offended should probably not be posting on a forum like this!
The outpour of support is awesome. Thank y'all. All of y'all (not the just the one's I "quoted" in this post) have definitely got my mind back on track. Thank you to everyone I appreciate it.
Oh lord. Well good for them for trying. I just don't think a jury gives a crap if someone who saw a bite mark is a dentist. Plain and simple.
I tend to think she got in willingly also.. just can't figure out why..
(snipped)
Even if being under the influence led EA to attack Christina, the way EA lied in front of the media by using verifiable facts, indicates he's missing a few brain cells imo. He lied to LE about his actions when, it is obvious to most people, there are ways to verify if what he said is true or not.
My point is, why were they living without utilities if they had enough money for even knockoff designer items? Ultimately it's just another thing on the long list of discrepancies.
same and same. Now if we knew the key situation it might shed some light. SN asks if she is okay to drive, meaning he thought she had her keys, right? CM walks 20 minutes supposedly headed to her car, so I assume she thought she had her keys. Did she get to her car and notice she did NOT have them again? Was EA supposed to drive her back to the apartment so she could check? I'm sure she would not want to walk back another 20 minutes. JMO
In trying to match AE injuries to what may have caused them. It's said that he was limping, and I don't think it has been confirmed whether Christina was wearing flip flops or sandals, and that might make a difference.
I'm wondering if she was wearing sandals, what kind they were, and if they were hard with a heel. If, for example, AE had Christina in a headlock, she would not have many options to fight back. She would probably try and pull at his fingers and bite his arm, and try kicking at his legs and stomping on his feet. If she was wearing flip flops and he was wearing shoes, I don't think that would be very effective at all. However, if she was wearing hard sandals, she could probably have sustained some damage, which caused him to limp.