KLM6
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2018
- Messages
- 564
- Reaction score
- 6,843
Imo, he was not trying to play dumb, but smart, considering all of his exaggerated comments seemingly to establish credibility. It is true we dont know which parts of his story are true or false. But in the end, does it matter what the exact location of the found bike was? The exact location of the bike does not weigh on my opinion of his guilt or innocence. Rather, the whole of LE actions very much does.And my problem with that is it automatically assumes guilt. I am trying to not ASSUME here, but try to get to the facts. If BM planted the bike then he may very well likely be pointing to that spot and LE would see this as a dead give away. (BUT if he is guilty could he be playing dumb? After all if the bike is a plant, it is a ruse, so pointing to another area could be trying to convince LE he is innocent? Another ruse?) It is a rhetorical question, "Where was the bike found?" because LE has the answer and they are not saying anything. TD and LS got locked onto tunnel vision and don't walk up and down the road and ask themselves, "Could it really be somewhere else?" That is investigative journalism. All of this is not factual and therefore the conclusions arrived at are not base on fact. But as MassGuy points out, LS probably has done her level best to determine the facts and myths about the bike and LE won't answer them.