This all looks completely different, if Kenzie’s phone turning off has an innocent explanation.
Get past that detail, and the door locks become irrelevant.
She’s a willing passenger at that point, and the attack would have likely begun at his house, and not in the car.
I can’t get past that detail though.
BBM:
I can.
"Innocent explanation" is a complete oxymoron when it comes to this evil moron.
I'm firmly in the camp that believes ML's murder was premeditated.
I believe every one of AA's actions that night was directed toward that aim.
Clearly, AA used some pretext to get ML to meet him in that dark, isolated parking lot at 3 am.
Just as clearly, he was able to successfully dupe ML into believing whatever ruse he used.
She went willingly to meet him that night.
Willingly, but unwittingly.
It doesn't require a huge stretch of the imagination to believe that he could also come up with some pretext to get her to turn off her phone once she arrived at the meeting location.
She may very well have turned off her phone willingly.
Willingly, but unwittingly.
To me, it doesn't matter whether AA turned off ML's phone forcibly, whether ML turned it off under duress, or whether ML turned it off willingly.
Regardless of whatever method he employed to get her phone turned off, i.e., force, coercion, or duplicity, it shows premeditation on his part.
Any way you slice it, there is no innocent explanation for her phone being turned off.
It doesn't matter where the attack started, we end up with the same tragic outcome.
All roads lead to Rome here...notwithstanding the fact that Rome is not in Utah.
JMO.