minor4th
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 8,529
- Reaction score
- 86,009
We don’t know if that really happened though.Seems like that the attempted and failed SA would be something unique. Especially given the victim’s age/gender.
JMO
We don’t know if that really happened though.Seems like that the attempted and failed SA would be something unique. Especially given the victim’s age/gender.
JMO
Why does that disturb you? I would be more disturbed if they HAD been shown to the courtroom. RA is not convicted. mooLooking ahead to this week, I am eagerly awaiting the prosecutors cross examination of the videos the defense has shown of RA in custody. They have said that they will do their cross once all the videos are shown.
I am still disturbed that they were not shown to the courtroom…and without sound, and without context….from the little that has been reported.
No but there was no obvious evidence of SA - when it might have been expected when LE said they had dna evidence and given that the victims had been undressed… mooWe don’t know if that really happened though.
No but there was no obvious evidence of SA - when it might have been expected when LE said they had dna evidence and given that the victims had been undressed… moo
Certainly RA would have learned from his lawyers that there was no SA.No but there was no obvious evidence of SA - when it might have been expected when LE said they had dna evidence and given that the victims had been undressed… moo
Fair point- back to what was known when from discoveryCertainly RA would have learned from his lawyers that there was no SA.
Libby was found nude.We don’t know if that really happened though.
I think 24/7 bright white institutional lights that never shut off for 13 months would make me crazy...it is little things that you can't begin to comprehend that add up and actually cause physical and mental problems...I am usually the first person to think someone is faking MI...not this time
Both girls were made to be naked.This is in my opinion a very important point- I think many would have assumed SA and or CSAM as part of the crime and lack of evidence of that might be something unique to the killer - just a thought- moo
Perhaps your questions are better directed to the Defense Lawyers who felt no need to ask those questions during their opportunity.Imo, yes it can possibly be the result of a wide reaching conspiracy to make him appear guilty. The evidence doesn't fit RA imo so much as it has been twisted and presented to appear to fit RA. We don't even have a time of death short of sometime between when they went DTH and when they were found dead. We have not heard about stomach contents (why not?). We didn't hear about if toxicology was done (why not)? We didn't even have investigators who knew to take the sticks at the scene to the lab. Moo.
New poster long time lurker
Can you direct me to where this was said? I have heard it reported differently and would like to compare. Thank you.
Richard Allen is on trial for nearly decapitating a teen age girl, and for fatally slicing another teenage girl's neck. These murderers were done in the context of sexually assaulting the teenagers (by his own admission).Why does that disturb you? I would be more disturbed if they HAD been shown to the courtroom. RA is not convicted. moo
Libby and Abby were not convicted either.Why does that disturb you? I would be more disturbed if they HAD been shown to the courtroom. RA is not convicted. moo
Seems RA does know though. Huh. And it matched his confessions.We don’t know if that really happened though.
There’s not a new and corrected document, obviously. It was a probable cause affidavit. Once the search is conducted and arrest made, you don’t go back and correct a PCA. This all came out during the 3day hearing and from some testimony during the trial. <modsnip - Rude>Were those time errors typographical in nature? Anything of actual substance to the case corrected/changed? Your statements are worrying. Do you have a link please to the new and corrected document? TIA
I agree that forced undressing is SA and it is also a form of control and the fact that the act of r@pe was interrupted per RA confession and physical evidence are distinct from the fact that they were forced to undress- I was referring to the fact that RA said that SA was interrupted due to getting spooked by the van (man) and not is forcing young girls to disrobe is/isnt SA - I would say that it is most definitely SA - mooBo
Both girls were made to be naked.
Abby Was then re-clothed. MOO was a sexual assault.
I agree with you wholeheartedly but what was evidenced is not the type of SA evidence you would find in a typical stranger abduction.Bo
Both girls were made to be naked.
Abby Was then re-clothed. MOO was a sexual assault.
That seems as likely as anything.How do we know Wala didn't know about it and provide it to him? Moo.