molly1255
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2015
- Messages
- 2,673
- Reaction score
- 18,656
Now, I'm not saying you're wrong - and I'm not saying it ultimately matters a dang vs. what went down - but I don't know how that question from Sydney, automatically equates to "SL didn't know that AT existed"; and I'm not sure how the reporter came to that conclusion. Largely because it seems to me, that the primary situation in which you'd ask someone "So, it's just going to be me and you...right?"; implies that you know the possibility of a third person actually exists; because how else do you know to ask? Wouldn't it be your default conclusion that "a date" means two people? Maybe BB said something as simple and offhand as "sometimes my roommate joins in"; and SL thought "ugh".
Again, I'm not sure it matters for testimony, but a lack of logic always bugs me...
JMO, in the nearly 140 messages exchanged between BB and Sydney, there was no mention of AT, per the FBI agent's testimony at trial.
Why did Sydney ask BB to confirm it would just be the two of them on the second date? I don't think anyone knows why. It could have been Sydney's intuition was trying to tell her there was something "off" about BB. It could be that BB may have told Sydney about other women she was involved with. We do know that BB lied to her and said it would just be the two of them.
It appears to me the three young women who testified thought BB was gay and then BB cleverly brought AT into the mix. JMO, these women were targeted to be in the "lifestyle" of AT and BB. JMO, Sydney was targeted from the get-go to be the victim in their murder fantasy. My thoughts are Sydney thought BB was gay and she knew nothing about AT.
The conclusion of this trial will be interesting and I'm especially interested in hearing what the defense has to say.
JMO