She and her beaux supposedly had sex the night after the body was discovered.
I can't imagine wanting to have sex after a sight like that had been burned into my memory. I think it would take some time. People do grieve differently but that seems hinky to me. It's almost like they got off on it.
When was the last time you saw an action movie where the hero and heroine did NOT stop to have sex in the middle of the slaughter? Those aren't real people, of course, but the stories are archetypal and are shaped the way they are because they resonate with a lot of people.
We may not like to admit it, but psychological accounts, war journals and world literature are filled with countless examples of people finding relief from death in sex. It isn't necessarily death that turns them on, it may very well be
surviving death, as sex can be very life-affirming, even if unconsciously.
Freud was well aware of this: he described the life (eros) and death (thanatos) impulses as in constant opposition, but also in a sort of partnership.
I just finished watching Dateline and there are some things I didn't know before.
1. AK and RS's cellphones were found discarded. RS said he had called 911 before he actually did.
I heard this on
48 Hours. I'm not sure what the discarded cell phones mean. Do you (or anyone else) have a theory?
As for the 911 call, police everywhere jump on such inconsistancies as "proof" of guilt. Yet human beings are fallible in the extreme; when prosecution witnesses make mistakes, the errors are always portrayed as "incidental" to the truth.
2. Computer forensic experts could find no evidence that RS was downloading movies at the time he claimed. AK claimed to be with him watching those movies.
Again, people make mistakes. But that includes cops and prosecutors.
3. When AK first came home she found the door open and proceeded to go in and take a shower without noticing the blood until she got out of the shower and dressed. (that doesn't pass the smell test. You come home find the door open, which is unusual, you don't notice anything wrong. You undress and take a shower. Get dressed and then notice the blood?! (In my best Judge Judy) If it doesn't make sense, it's not true!!
Apparently, Judge Judy was never a college-age youngster. The lifestyles of that age group can be surprisingly casual, particularly when they live together away from parents. The open door may have been unusual, but that doesn't prove AK thought it required immediate action from her. Hindsight, of course, is 20/20.
4. Her multiple stories, which IMO, could be signs of coerced information. I don't think that happened but it does fit how things like that can happen. JMO. Her multiple stories have been mentioned here by others and I don't want to go looking for them. Hopefully someone will post them and you can see how convoluted her stories were.
You and I have discussed the possibility of coercion and I'll join you in declining to rehash.
But I have a question: what is the time period of her multiple stories? Do they all stem from the general time of the initial interrogation? To me, that isn't as damning as switching stories and conveniently remembering and forgetting after one has been prepped for trial. (See Darlie Routier transcript.)
5. Her boss was planning on firing her and rumor was he was going to hire Meredith.
Since the job at the bar wasn't a longtime one and hardly a career-path position, that's a pretty thin motive for murder, don't you think? (Not saying it couldn't be true, just that it isn't an experienced professional facing the destruction of her career.)
6. She tried to clean up the blood.
Do you know how well she tried, how long she spent trying? I'm wondering because not everyone reacts to violence by immediately thinking to preserve the crime scene. Some people react to shock instinctively by trying to remove the source of that shock.
7. If she was railroaded then why did her super rich, Italian, beaux get convicted too?
Um, guilt by association? The conviction of the boyfriend may suggest that more is going on here than anti-American feeling, but there's no particular reason why he can't have been railroaded, too.
8. She made claims of being hit by police officers and yet there is no evidence it ever happened. Only her word for it.
I understand skepticism toward her claim, but how is that evidence of her guilt in the murder? As I wrote above, in the trial snip I saw, she said being hit
frightened her, not that it scarred her. As for collaboration, who was going to do that? I assume you don't expect police officers to come out and announce, "Yeah, we slapped her around a bit."
That's all I can think of off the top of my head. Isabella knows a lot more about this than I do. Hopefully she'll be able to help.
But that's a lot, Dan. I really appreciate you and Isabella and your efforts to bring the rest of us up to date.
It's just something I've been wondering, but in the end, it really wouldn't have much to do with her falsely naming Patrick, as she herself admitted it was untrue. I'm more curious what led to her doing it ~ something preplanned to get suspicion off herself or the pressure of interrogation and following along with what she thought LE wanted to hear. I'm still inclined to think it was self-preservation on her part. MOO
