Sleepysleuther
Lawyer
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2021
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 124
Although I recall LE said remains had been found and that it was likely to take some time to identify who they belonged to. Which makes it less likely to have been simply a poor choice of words. It’s not clear, I agree, but the way it was phrased suggests the body was unidentifiable and wouldn’t be straight forward/quick to identify. Also bearing in mind the extensive searches that continue, it suggests to me that it wasn’t as simple as finding an intact body, sadly. JMOI don't belive SE body was dismembered. I remembered reading "remains " were found but later changed to body.I think they regretted saying remains,as it led to unnecessary speculation IMO. They also said SE WAS identified by dental records,not HAD TO BE identified by dental records.A difference IMO.