thesetup85
Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2013
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 3
I would certainly agree that there a lot of insensitive people out there. And obviously not all of them are murderers.
There may be members here that talk about the unusual behavior of the defendants but I haven't seen anyone that thinks they're guilty based solely on that. If you read back through the threads I think you will find the evidence that those that believe in their guilt hang their hat on. Welcome to the discussion.
For a second, let's just assume that AK is not guilty in any sense in the murder (just bear with me on this).
So right after the murder and before the arrest, AK was her usual self (aka insensitive). Why? Because she felt no need to change her attitude as she had no idea she was going to be arrested for the murder. This is how you would expect innocent people to think.
After being convicted and put in jail, AK changes her attitude. She starts lying about how MK was her friend and how hard she cried, etc etc. So now she is being deceptive. Why? Because she had a reason to be deceptive (i.e. get public sympathy and strengthen her case).
If she was indeed guilty, she would have been deceptive from the moment the body was discovered. Why? Becuase she would have known that she can come under the microscope given the imperfect crime, staging effort, Guede being an uncontrolleable element and many other factors in the back of her mind. If guilty, she would have pretended to care for MK right from the start, or tried to frame her boss right from the start. This is how you would expect guilty people would think.
(Now, we are just talking behavioral science here, and that too for the sake of discussion. I know there is a plethora of physical evidence piled up against her).