was the dog killed because he / she would be able to recognise the attackers?
Speaking of the dog, I wonder whose dog it truly was?
The faux zen aside and going to the point, Did the husband affirm the purchase of the dog? Was the dog and related care ever an issue between the couple?
That aside, the husband's relating of the murder seems to be:
- I was sleeping down stairs and my wife and baby were upstairs.
- A gang of foreign criminals breaks the security camera, kills the dog, then bursts into our home.
- I was able to tell that one stood guard outside
(how?)
- They demand to know "where the money is"- seeming to imply they knew a large sum of money was in the home
(how?).
- I immediately give them the money. Despite the easy and lucrative gains, the gang does not leave.
- I am tied up, but not harmed. Meanwhile, my wife is attacked upstairs and tortured for more money for an hour. (
why would the gang interrogate the wife under torture, but not harm the husband despite him being tied up and also maintaining that there was no more money? Why would the gang think there was more money?).
-At some point, they point a pistol at the baby's head while demanding more money
(how did he know they did that?). My wife is eventually murdered.
- The gang flees. Fortunately, I am not harmed and able to wiggle free from the ropes and call the police.