I haven't seen it mentioned here, but it's possible I missed it: if LE has video footage from FD's JC neighbor(s) that captured FD returning home in the evening, post garbage can odyssey, and checking his mail (which matched up with cell records re ping location, etc.), might they also have footage from the rest of the day that they would have compared against cell phone travel (and for MT, as well)?
I am just wondering why only the video of his returning home in the evening is mentioned? Is it because he got out of the car so it is confirmation that he is the driver? According to the arrest warrant, he came and went from the JC address a few times that day. I would love to see any footage that captured those departures and arrivals.
Just wondering: Was he rushing? Was he alone? Is anything in the truck? The footage was good enough that they can read his license plate and tell the color of his clothing. Can they tell if he'd changed clothes?
And what's with the quick turn arounds between JC and MS that day? Unless I'm reading it wrong, he left MS "area" at 3:38pm (after spending 2 hours there) and arrived at JC (home) at 4:17pm. At 5:21pm he is back at MS. At 5:34pm he's back at JC (MUCH faster drive that time or am I confused?).
Or was he on foot/bike instead?
Also, nothing is said about what time FD's phone first left JC that day. The warrant only says that it left on that date. Wonder if there is video footage showing that first departure that matches his cell records. Or not? Do we know what time he left that morning and/or what vehicle he was driving on those back and forth drives in the afternoon? IF he was driving?
Anyway, this makes me hopeful that LE has more info than we realize. In fact, I wondered if the mention of the neighbor's (neighbors'? - not a punctuation debate, but are there two neighbors with mailbox footage? It sort of seemed so the way it was written in the warrant) with its apparently good resolution (showing tags) was just to let FD know that they know more than he perhaps expected them to.
Or maybe I am misunderstanding something?
All MOO, as always.