For me, this trial's all going to come down to Dulin. With RA subtly noting, oh, yeah, I had the phone on the trail ("stock ticker"), there's an almost subliminal message of trustworthiness being delivered through that piece of info (phone=trackability). No murderer would bring a phone to his murder. Tip's lost, somehow filed under his street name instead of RA's last name. (And I'll be waiting to see what is listed on that form in the blank that says "name." Alternatively, I'll be waiting to see if an interview with a conservation officer vs municipal police or sheriff impacts the way that document would be filed/stored.). The interview wasn't done in an ideal location and wasn't recorded. (You'd wonder whose idea that arrangement was, but we'll see.)
If any of these turn out to be the case-- didn't have the phone, arranged for that interview to be done in that way, "accidentally" jumbled up the info so he gave the street address as last name but now is swearing up and down that's not the case-- if any of these happened, this person knows how to read people and knows how to manipulate not just the people themselves, but actual circumstances and outcomes in a wider context. Someone like that would manufacture conflicting confessions and feign madness. Right now, my money's on him not having that phone. And he's supposedly such a family man, anyone could have an emergency, why no phone? The answer for me is because he's a murderer and he was going to be murdering two young girls that day. If you ask without being able to prove it, though-- he had it, he had the phone, the "stock ticker."
All the stars line up in the most horrible way for me if Richard Allen didn't have his phone that day.
