Charlot123
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 8,374
- Reaction score
- 56,696
Very much a possibility, plus they're now insisting it's someone from the immediate area or someone very familiar with that part of Carroll County.
Early on references were made to a possible hitch hiker, and maybe someone carrying a backpack or other bag of some sort or another. I never thought the former, but the latter is a possibility.
Then the bogus sketch came out and threw people off. I never thought the BG could be much over age 40, yet here we were convinced it was some (using a phrase I've picked up since living here) ate up older middle-aged guy who's angry enough to want to go around murdering teens, when in reality we could be looking at someone around half the age of what we thought.
I think there's a real possibility LE were thrown off in the beginning, could have been a tip that sounded suggestive in nature, but who knows? I just have a hard time reconciling the vehicle parked by C.R. 300 and LE not mentioning it early on. Just seems weird to me, and one would think they would have wanted to get information about the identity of its owner or whoever was driving it. This is not new information, it was known early on and LE sat on it.
Which brings to mind another issue, and it just kind of popped into my head. Why wouldn't they be hungry for information on the vehicle and its driver early on, vs. releasing the poor audio released a week after the murders? Not just poor audio, but they released "down the hill" without "Guys". Why not just hold on to the audio for a bit, and instead focus on the vehicle and other pertinent stuff early on? Makes no sense to me.
No mention of a vehicle for over two years. Even if they had a detailed description, they could have just asked about a vehicle being parked there.
Here we were thinking BG was some ate up older guy with major issues in his life, when in reality it could be a young-looking and sounding young man. This whole time. 100+ threads later.
Let this year be the year, for the victims in this case, their families, their community.
1) They are all distant relatives. They are a close-knit community. A farmland. Maybe for small, close-knit societies, it is hard to even believe that one of their own could be a killer, and such a heinous one? Not a meth deal gone bad, no, a heinous murder of two innocent teenagers.
So I think initially, they hoped it was an outsider, and that guided their search. A mistake, but understandable.
2) As I have said, I am sometimes thinking that the people involved are - not politicians, not police, not wealthy people - but someone who is/was/still is a role model for the community and society in general. And I am not necessarily thinking it is a priest or a teacher, but someone who has dedicated his life and money to helping others? Someone who looks very selfless? This is when it would be very hard to accept that this person could be a killer.