LisaB
Well-Known Member
Lisa, I really didn't get the explanation above? I'm lost on that one, I'm being for real not snarky or sassy or anything. Thank you.
Unfortunately the original part of this conversation didn't get carried forward, but what I was saying is this: she was asked "did you lie to LE about knowing what happened to Hailey?" and she said that she didn't. The original poster said she "didn't answer the question" which was, in essence, (per the OP) "do you know what happened to Hailey?"
She was NOT ASKED that question. She was asked if she had lied to LE when she said she did not know what had happened to Hailey Her answer to the question she was actually asked was that she had not lied to LEbut that essentially answers the question of whether or not she knows what happened to Hailey (the unasked question the OP wanted her to answer).
Obviously I do not know for certain who is lying about what, it seems as if we are basing this conversation on the premise that her statements after being released are truthful or at least the basis for our musings.
She indicated (today) that she did not lie to LE about (not) knowing what happened to Hailey.
Therefore (for the sake of argument), if she did not lie when she told them she did not know, then then the answer to the question of whether she knew what happened to Hailey would not have changed from the time she first told police she does not know.
So the answer to the OPs question (deductively speaking) as to whether she knows is that she does not know. That is what she told LE and she says that was not a lie.
