The idea that NH picked Kelli as his victim doesn't fit what her family said about her. They said she's not the vulnerable type, regardless of her size, so she doesn't fit with NH's other crime imo.
Anyway, no abduction/crimes seem logical anyway. Does it ever make sense that a man kills his wife of over twenty years, or the mother of his children, or someone he's been married to for ninety days? Why does logic have to be involved when contemplating who a murderer may be?
Bundy knew women who he didn't kill too. One of them was a coworker who never suspected he was capable of the horrendous acts it turns out he committed. Wouldn't logic dictate that he should have killed her too? Apparently, that's all he ever thought about.
I can't understand how NH got away without leaving evidence. He was very stupid the first time on many levels.
My suspicions linger regarding more than one possible perp.
Besides, recently I've been thinking that there are perps out there who are purposely acting illogically by the way they leave the crime scene by complicating it to suggest a certain logical explanation (McStay family for instance).
p.s. Did you get the memo? It said you're not supposed to insult another poster. Hey, I have feelings too!
Just to be clear, I never insulted anyone, simply responded to the logic of the replied argument by reduction, nothing more.
Kelli was a small 105 pound women, regardless of her demeanor, someone like NH, who was perhaps exploiting the utility of friendship through basic civility, could have easily attacked her, especially considering the alcohol consumption and circumstances.
Further, sometimes there are no set types, simply urges and opportunities with killers, they covet what they see and what stimulates their desire at the moment.
As with Bundy and with respect to many killers, he kept relationships of civility with women that he did not kill, these women were off limits by necessity to avoid getting caught and spoiling his front of being normal.
Clearly, Bundy hunted women but was not opposed to killing a child if urge and opportunity met, hence the complexity of the killing choices of a killer.
Just because Bundy was dominated by his internal disposition does not mean he could not engage in civility and relationships of utility that would seem normal to others, that was his only concrete point of connection with the real world.
He obviously had times of suppression of his urges but eventually his desires grew out of control and he was caught.
I really do not know what happened that night but given the only facts that we do know, that Kelli was with a violent sex offender and last seen by him, it must give us pause to alternate theories that are literally baseless speculation and total conjecture.
It is logically possible that NH had nothing to do with her disappearance but it is not probable given what information we do have concerning the history of NH and the circumstances of the night.
They have some circumstantial evidence on NH but perhaps NH has refined his methods, we can not assume he would always act as a reckless 16 year old offender.
Further, we are finding a lot of missing women who simply vanish, no evidence left behind, simply gone.
In most of these cases, foul play is suspected but LE has little to go on because these predators are evolving their methods.
LE apparently thinks NH has information as to what happened to Kelli and have provided no indication any other suspects are in play on any level.
Therefore, to take the other approach, where is the evidence, even circumstantial, that Kelli was abducted by another person or persons?
We just have to pray someone comes forth with any information that helps to break this case wide open, for Kelli and her family.
lease: Woe.
