Okay, if it was known that there were some issues going on between these men, why did they not interview them? This makes absolutely no sense to me especially since the two men are dead! I mean, don't you want to cover *ALL* bases in a murder investigation???
I didn't mean to mislead anyone here. I just cut off the quote from the pdf to show about the argument between the men.
From what I THINK from reading that PDF,.....the officer or detective the lawyer was questioning, she was not a regular member of that police force that covered the territory where the crime occurred. I think she was sheriff. Anyway, when the call went out, they called in 'All available units' or whatever. She was close by so she responded.
From what she said, everything was kind of chaotic when she first arrived. The first responders were still trying to figure out what had occurred. So they just assigned her to question various persons, etc. Then I believe she was to talk to the 'wife' and found her at the next door neighbors, 'Smith's.' Anyway, she did questioning that first night and the next morning, but it wasn't her job to 'follow-up' on anything. She was basically doing the questioning, taking notes, and turning them over to the proper agency.
So, the local LE may have talked to this Curley person. We just don't know what the result is. LOL, or I might find it IF I ever get a chance to finish reading the documents.....(I keep getting side-tracked

)
But,.........the point still is, there's MUCH MORE to this story than trying to BLAME a little 8 yo for the crime. They might TRY doing a REAL INVESTIGATION first! ............Before they start pointing their fingers at a child!
JMHO!
fran