Would this still apply if the murderer killed himself at another site after the murders at the victims' residence? Hypothetical question.
It seemed
possible when the crime was first announced that the killer of the four
might have committed suicide someplace away from the crime scene.
But now that three days have gone by since the crime, it seems likely that the police would have figured out a connection between a local suicide and the crime. I think the killer is still out there alive, but is he still in Moscow or someplace far away?
Three days after the crime we still only know what we knew one day after the crime, i.e., 1) four dead U of Idaho students in a house; 2) killed with "a bladed edge" weapon such as a knife 3) police believe it was "targeted" (but we don't know exactly what the police meant by "targeted").
The only other significant information that we have is that
two more days have gone by without police making an arrest or naming a suspect or "person of interest."
Those two days going by with no new information makes me consider other scenarios for the crime. Initially, the facts of the case made me think that the killer was someone who was known to one or more of the victims. Now I am starting to wonder whether this could be a serial killing, and if it is, it becomes a much harder case to solve--it is usually harder to solve a murder where the killer is not known to the victim(s).
It's still very possible that the police have a good idea of a suspect or at least a person of interest. But if they do, it's hard to keep that a secret indefinitely. At some point they have to do or say something to reassure the public and the families of the victims. The more time that goes by with no new information, the more I think it might be true that the killer was not someone known to the victims.