thank you for sharing these. imo jmo Shannon has some personal reasons for wanting to speak out. I wonder what those could be? on a petty note, I really hate to see errors in legal pleadings. imo jmo
Potentially.Let's be realistic
If we leave our DNA whenever we are, even without touching things, then simple logic tells us that our traces are left in overwhelming way at the crime scene, not the innocent person "framed".
Let's not get crazy - otherwise anybody can claim that he/she was maliciously framed by phantom perps.
Thank you very much.
I have no further questions
Edited to say: I don't think it has anything to do with intelligence or education. IMO, an innocent person would answer all of LE's questions regardless of where they went to the best of their ability. Whether or not they had a lawyer or in what manner they were arrested, MOO
I don't recall the victims families being part of the gag order. JMO
No comment.
After watching hundreds of true crime shows, I would want a lawyer with me before I said a word, even of course, assuming I was innocent. I have seen so many crime shows where the police get so focused on one potential defendant that they are like a dog with a bone. Many of those people they focused on did not have attorneys, answered all of their questions and even took a polygraph test. I would not take a polygraph either because they cannot be relied on which is why they are not allowed in a court of law. Sociopaths pass them every day of the week, and innocent people flunk just as often. I find myself livid watching some of these cases where the police so focused on only one person, to the exclusion of almost all others, it is horrible to watch. Of course the police have to focus on those closest to the murder victim, but so often it is a singular focus. There is a series on Oxygen called "Unexpected Killers"- I keep saying for the police there should not be unexpected killers because they should not limit their field of suspects to only those close to the victim.
It all depends on the good work of detectives.
www.forbes.com
I found Paul Holes' book Unmasked really compelling, and he provided examples you'd probably love reading about. imo BK's silence and request for an attorney, innocent or guilty though he may be, was a smart move that showed he learned something in his crim law classes. jmo imo.
I wonder how the defense is going to handle the DNA in BK's case. That's what I'm interested to see. also, if you haven't ventured to the innocence project, you can find the reasons for exonerations and the numbers. also, this:
