I for one would be really happy if we could drop the subjects of whether or not he's a loser because he had a car or whether we find him ugly vs. attractive. Probably not really relevant, in my opinion.
True......could he claim he "blacked out" while being seen on surveillance footage driving her car, for instance? And how many hours of being "blacked out" is he claiming occurred? I wonder how many times in the past has he used the "I don't know what happened, I just blacked out" to cover up his acting out on rage and his paranoid schizophrenia while not taking his meds & using drugs/alcohol??--just my hunch and (all moo).
I can't drive and don't own a car but I won't take offence at the idea that that makes me a loser... I know I'm a loser, just for slightly different reasons.
I don't think this guy has done it before. I think he's always had a fantasy of murdering someone (see the Hannibal threats to his mother) and he's finally gone through with it, and more.
The parents then had the order rescinded I am assuming once he sobered up.
I honestly think people are giving this guy to much credit, with all my heart I am hoping he was blind drunk and killed her in a rage then tried to dispose of the body.
Does anyone else find this odd? A grown woman sharing a cell phone account with her mother?
http://www.people.com/article/frien...ered-mother?xid=socialflow_facebook_peoplemag
Not sure if this has been posted, if so sorry. It says that she met him online two months ago.
http://mediaweb.kirotv.com/document...omicide probable cause doc_3674402_ver1.0.pdf
I just noticed something in the documents. It's says he told them they went back to her house after the game on Friday in her vehicle, but then the next sentence says he told them he was too drunk to remember how they got back to her house or what happened?
Did he say both things? Was one a slip? Or did he say one or the other?
I don't get the reasoning of the vehicle either. It would have been better for him to say they parted ways after the game and he didn't know what transpired with her after that. Why would be put himself at her house?
http://mediaweb.kirotv.com/document...omicide probable cause doc_3674402_ver1.0.pdf
I just noticed something in the documents. It's says he told them they went back to her house after the game on Friday in her vehicle, but then the next sentence says he told them he was too drunk to remember how they got back to her house or what happened?
Did he say both things? Was one a slip? Or did he say one or the other?
I don't get the reasoning of the vehicle either. It would have been better for him to say they parted ways after the game and he didn't know what transpired with her after that. Why would be put himself at her house?
http://mediaweb.kirotv.com/document...omicide probable cause doc_3674402_ver1.0.pdf
I just noticed something in the documents. It's says he told them they went back to her house after the game on Friday in her vehicle, but then the next sentence says he told them he was too drunk to remember how they got back to her house or what happened?
Did he say both things? Was one a slip? Or did he say one or the other?
I don't get the reasoning of the vehicle either. It would have been better for him to say they parted ways after the game and he didn't know what transpired with her after that. Why would be put himself at her house?
Saying that it is possible that this isn't the first time he killed someone is not giving him credit for anything other than being a murderer (he is one--no question there) who MIGHT have murdered before. IMO, to the contrary, I think it's giving him too much credit to assume he was just super drunk and lost it and didn't really know what he was doing. And then felt he needed to saw off her head and other body parts in her bathtub for the practical reason that her remains would be better disposed of that way. I am not sure I understand why one would "hope" for that scenario. Is it because it makes him less of a bad guy? Same grisly crime either way, right?
Maybe because his DNA was in her house anyway and maybe he couldn't prove he was ever there before.
I also noticed in the docs it said he had $2650 on him. Did the author forget a period? Was he really carrying $2650 in his pockets when he was arrested?
http://mediaweb.kirotv.com/document...omicide probable cause doc_3674402_ver1.0.pdf
I just noticed something in the documents. It's says he told them they went back to her house after the game on Friday in her vehicle, but then the next sentence says he told them he was too drunk to remember how they got back to her house or what happened?
Did he say both things? Was one a slip? Or did he say one or the other?
I don't get the reasoning of the vehicle either. It would have been better for him to say they parted ways after the game and he didn't know what transpired with her after that. Why would be put himself at her house?
I agree that the parking makes sense for your average person trying to get home after the game.
But for a guy who just murdered his girlfriend and threw away her remains in a garbage can in the CD, it makes a lot less sense that he would park HER car there.
Sure, it's a convenient place to park to bus home. But it's Belltown. People are going to see that car.