snoofer
New Member
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,170
- Reaction score
- 0
JMO
my last post on this issue...I understand that many a thief has forgotten about a camera but what I am saying is IF they were so particular after the crime to cover their steps..ie: toss the clothing...wash the car...lose a car seat...etc. etc. why not be concerned at the start to cover their tracks... doesn't make sense to me at all...JMO and now I have stated all I want and from this debate I will move on....respectfully....
no doubt there was a point that either one of them might have wished after the crime they had wiggled their butts up a few poles and pulled down some of those cameras while disposing of some evidence over the initial weeks after; but I could be wrong JMO
also since the cameras DID catch them in the act; was anyone else seen taking her? It does seem strange I agree; yet, there TLM is leading her away, there the two are at the HD, there is MTR pings at the scene. And there it is, TS DNA in his car and blood. AND yet there it is MTR lying to LE. And yet there it is, all the funky stuff he did after to deceive. Yes it is hard to believe he would do this crime or TLM would do this crime in front of cameras but yet the video is there.
I wonder what the stats are on people incarcerated for crime who had video evidence presented against them at trial. I wonder how many of them groan when they think of those cameras as they serve those sentences. JMO
JMO