dtowndetective411
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2017
- Messages
- 359
- Reaction score
- 3,324
Actually, to add to that, you might expect this MORE from them if they didn’t know yes/or/no whether he was guilty of a crime. Perhaps if they knew he was, they’d be more likely to not protect him and to cooperate on what they knew; but if they don’t know if he is guilty of anything, and have a sense of doubt about the circumstances or hope that he is innocent, they don’t want to do anything to drive the story one way or the other. Just a thought from your last paragraph.I also don't think it's crazy to think maybe BL didn't tell his parents anything but they knew that something was wrong once Gabby was reported missing. Think back to Cindy Anthony's 911 call when they found Casey's car and it smelled like decomposition.
When LE showed up at the L house, the L parents may have called their lawyer and said "Brian came back from a roadtrip without his girlfriend and he won't tell us what happened. We thought they just broke up but the police just showed up to take Gabby's van and she was reported missing by her parents. What do we do?"
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to at that moment say "wow, something is seriously wrong and using common sense it's possible a crime was committed. Let's treat this as if a crime was definitely committed."
And from that point on, SB's advice was assuming the worst without knowing one way or another. You would expect them to act as they have even in this fact pattern. I am not saying this is the morally or ethically correct thing to do, just an alternative fact pattern where they don't actually know what happened but they take their attorney's advice to prepare for the worst.
I still hold out that thus far, the sketchiest thing from them is getting the date he “went missing” wrong. That would be very memorable IMO. That makes me question them more than anything else.