I've read the earlier threads and news articles. And I wouldn't be rehashing it if I thought it had been hashed sufficiently already.
I don't dispute that somebody thought they saw two deer (not Kelsi though - and maybe not even the person who Kelsi was communicating with about the shoe) - I guess some man in the same search group as the person who talked to Kelsi about the shoe - so I guess in that sense it becomes almost like third person hearsay - or at least something that I think it should be acceptable on these threads to rehash..).
"Then the same person put up his phone and saw two deer in the ground moving." "And so, he (again, I think is a different person than the one who yelled up about the shoe) was looking to see what it might be, and he saw two deer standing up there, and when he saw them, he moved the camera down, and that's when he saw them."
-------
"was looking to see what it might be" ?
"in the ground moving" ?
"two deer standing up there" ?
"and when he saw them, he moved the camera down" ?
"and that's when he saw them" ?
From Kelsi, who got it from the girl, who got it from the guy with the phone (on zoom).
It seems unlikely to me that the deer were standing anywhere close to two dead girls. And I seriously doubt that the deer were standing within 100 yards or so of the search group.. So just how far away were the deer? How far above the girls? Could the man have only thought he saw two deer - when actually he was looking directly at the crime scene? I think it's possible. Would LE have told us if that is what happened?
From a distance in the woods, deer and deer antlers can look like a lot of different things (branches, for one). I have also thought before that BG may have been a deer hunter. We've also been told he left a "signature".
In an attempt to ID the perp, and knowing that there was a "signature" (or more than one "signature") left at the crime scene - and that the crime had a "twist" - many of us have been speculating about the crime scene itself.
It is not unreasonable to question whether a searcher in the woods, looking at trees and branches and leaves, from a long way away, and speaking through another party to Kelsi (three translaters if we count Kelsi) might've related seeing something that they only thought was two deer.
Again, IF LE came to find out that it wasn't two deer - and that instead it turned out to be the "signature" - they would not have released this info to the public, and we would all still be certain that somebody saw two deer. It's at least within the realm of possibility. Just speculating and trying to think outside the box. Jmo