Is "evidence of homicide"----just a body? or is evidence of homicide things like blood and broken tree branches and struggle in the grass? In other words when they say "someone placed her there" that suggests the murder and other actions on the body occurred elsewhere. When they say "evidence of homicide" that sounds like some action occurred at the CB house. Which is it?
I think it can be both. Perhaps investigators found blood at the house, maybe on the back patio/deck area. Maybe her body was placed near/in the house initially until a decision was made to place her by the water.
There can be more than one crime scene. Perhaps she was killed elsewhere, brought to the house leaving blood evidence, and then placed on the river bank. It doesn't mean that one article is correct to the exclusion of the other. They can both be correct.
Of all the investigations I've observed recently, investigators are being VERY tight lipped about this one. That lack of information leads to speculation like mine in this post... that she was killed somewhere, then brought to the house, then placed on the river bank.
Still, the one question that I can't get out of my mind is WHY were her feet placed in the water? To do that, the person pulling the body by its feet had to go into the water, or if he/she were carrying the body, he/she had to go into the water, turn back toward the shore, then dump the body. No matter how he/she was carrying or dragging the body, he/she had to go into the water. Even if two people moved the body, the grasping the feet had to go into the water. WHY? That is the answer I am eager to hear.
Was there blood or fingerprint evidence on the boots from an injury to one of the assailants that they did not notice until they began moving Mackenzie toward the shore?
This is bothering me constantly... hope we find out soon.