Would one of the SA advocates please be so kind as to explain to me your theory on why SA would block his phone number when calling TH on the very day she was murdered? Did he block his number when he called others that day? TIA
After working in the corporate world for over 30 years and then as a business owner myself for 16 year from 1993-2009 before retiring... I have never heard of anyone (me included) with a legitimate business blocking their phone number from being seen.. Especially when they are calling someone about a service they specifically had requested from the person they were calling. I could possibly understand if SA was collecting an outstanding debt owed by the one he called but that was not the case here. Why do you think he asked for TH specifically that day? Had he called before asking for TH to come out?
Since this case has come up again, I have asked numerous friends who own businesses the same question, and they look at me very puzzled, but all of them said they would not do such a thing nor have they ever done so and said they have never had a reason to do so. They kept saying 'why would anyone do that?' They couldn't come up with any logical reason/explanation why a business owner wouldn't want their number seen and neither can I. So that is why I am asking any of you what you think as to the rational reason why he did this. Its just been one of things among others that has never made any sense to me.
Like I said earlier, IMO, the vast majority of jurors tend to not believe in mere coincidences especially when it come in the form of evidence entered at trial. I have been a juror on five different criminal cases including one death penalty case for double murder. I have tried to rationalize this away for awhile now but I am still unable to do so when applying logic and commonsense. I just cant chalk the call blocking up as being benign or a mere coincidence when applying rational thought processes to it. Everything SA did the very day TH was murdered has great relevance like in all cases and each piece had a purposeful intent behind it, imo. It takes thought and physical actions to hit *69 or whatever the number he used to hide who is calling and didn't he do this twice or do I have that wrong? If it happened twice that is even more relevant. JMO though
I will never forget ADA Rick Distaso's words he told the jury in his closing during the Scott Peterson trial. . "Just how many coincidences are you willing to believe and still be able to call yourselves reasonable people?"
I think about those words when I think of this case.
This has come up before. IIRC, SA was known to *67 due to the notoriety he had. Maybe he was a tad paranoid?
However, since he himself, was calling, do you assume he was attempting to hide his identity? What happens after TH answers?
Why does it seem as though any amount of, "coincidences" errors mistakes... on the part of the officials, are all just innocent little things that could happen to just anyone in LE, but that *67 call signifies devious intent?
I find it impossible to believe SA had this planned. ( easier to think he might have snapped, but I doubt it)...
This guy planned this murder, and lured TH to her doom, and he had this all carefully thought out...
And so he thinks a week, or so, before he wins a huge settlement is THE perfect day to commit his master crime? And further, he announces, like the town crier, that THIS GIRL WILL BE AT MY HOUSE THIS AFTERNOON?
Make sense of that for me if you will...
He could have waited till he had bocou bucks and called an escort for additional stealth, if he had this rape/murder planned out since he was in the joint, like some here keep professing....
I have seen it put this way, and I must agree:
"We don't have context of how often he used *67 on outgoing calls. If he habitually dialed *67, perhaps because he was in the media spotlight for the lawsuit against the county, then this instance of *67 is a lot less incriminating".
