Recent content by daily

He could choose not to take the stand. He never actually has to say anything. The investigators would need yo present enough evidence where he wouldnt have a choice and would have to explain himself. But his lawyer will pick apart eye witnesses and try to explain any dna in his car. The case...

If he threw her in a dumpster, that could create a bunch of evidence. Does he have bags? What size? Did he purchase bags? When? Where? Is there video of bags being purchased? They could pull records of all garbage bags sold from each store. Did his roommates notice any new bags? Does...

(Regarding whether Longo said abduction charge was from forensics) Unless I missed something, I don't think so. What he said was (I'm quoting from an article, I don't have the transcript) 'This afternoon we reached that point where the commonwealth [Virginia’s attorney’s office]...

. They can find out if he was at work that Monday, and cross check that with credit card history.

I know they have evidence. They have eyewitnesses. They have them on video together. They have her missing now. That could be enough for the abduction charge alone. Beyond that, I'm not going to assume they found clothing or something substantial with her DNA (again, with his hand on her, a...

That is 100% reasonable. Ultimately we are all spectators to whom they owe no explanation. I'm just not going to assume his guilt based on undescribed "evidence".

Exactly! It seems like if they actually found her clothing, there would be a harsher charge than abduction. They might conclude abduction just by witnesses saying he was the last person she was with.

Many times they did (and still do) get the wrong guy. Towns could be smaller, the victim more closely known, and convictions could be obtained on emotion ('are you REALLY going to let her killer get away with murder?) rather than hard evidence. Prosecutors are rewarded for convictions, not...

AWESOME! Thank you so much, these should be in front post

Bingo.

Did he actually say that? I dont have a transcript, but the only quote i can find is: “We reached that point that the Commonwealth felt we had probable cause to seek an arrest warrant,”. I havent seen the PC, does he say the new warrant is from dna evidence?

But didnt the police watch him drive recklessly and not pull him over? If they thought he was endangering passengers, they would have pulled him over. Has he even been charged with fleeing from the cops while driving? I think if they actually wanted him in jail for reckless driving, they...

I dont believe for a second that they lost track of him. That would mean he could be with hannah right now, and the police nor fbi would have any idea. He could have driven from the police station straight to her body, and they wouldnt even know? Theres no way they dont know where he is...

Does anyone know, after he is arrested, how long before probable cause hearing? I think thats when the police have to state their evidence.

Thats what happened witht he reckless driving warrant. They were following him and didnt pull him over. They didnt even accuse him of running from the police. They could have arrested him right there, if they wanted to.