(**Sorry i accidentally posted this halfway through composing so if it makes no sense sorry)
So what do y'all make of the prosecutors stating one reason for not releasing the PCA was some witnesses were and/or are juveniles? Not asking relative to is it a reason to keep the PCA sealed, more brain storming on what it implies might be in the PCA. Does it suggest:
1. As some here, including myself, have speculated that even though RA has no substantial criminal record that he had done things in the past that he just didn't get caught/prosecuted for. Where these witnesses witness to RA acting inappropriate to underage girls etc.?
2. Was one (or both) of the two victims aware of RA somehow and he creeped them out did they discuss this with their peers. (this one seems unlikely because from what we know they did not seem to recognise or "know" BG)
3. Did one or both of the victims discuss someone with their peers that was actual RA catfishing?
4. Something more mundane like confirming a piece of jewelry found a RAs (JUST A HYPOTHETICAL NOT SUGGESTING THIS HAPPENED) belong to one of the victims.
What do y'all think.
I've considered point 3 - that one of the victims may have discussed RA as being creepy with someone else because: we know from LE that LG posted two photos of AW on the bridge to snapchat at 2:07pm.
Then the RL warrant states, and I quote:
"...at approximately 2:13pm which was the time of LAST CONTACT with LG and AW by cellular device." (point 1 of the warrant). The warrant also notes that they're believed to have made contact with the perp at 2:13pm.
I suppose it is possible they were chatting or texting with someone and mentioned some guy had creeped them out. I cannot imagine how awful that might feel for someone if that had in fact happened - imagine knowing your friends were feeling creeped out and you either didn't get hte message in time to help them, or didn't know the danger they were actually in and didn't notify anyone else? I can totally see how that could have happened - they text a friend about a creep, and the friend maybe just blows it off because the girls didn't seem too alarmed and then later the girls end up dead.
**
Also, while re-reading this document, yet again, something occurred to me which is probably a coincidence, but what if, it isn't? From the doc:
"Approximately 5:30pm was the last successful "PING" of the cellular phone by AT & T."
It goes on to say:
"Carroll County Sheriff's Office was notified at approximately 5:30pm that LG and AW were missing".
Odd coincidence or, is that important somehow? If the perp was using a police scanner, it is possible he knew exactly when police had been alerted - you can listen to the scanners over the web or on a phone at Broadcastify (link below). Creepy.
So when this warrant says the last successful PING of the phone was at 5:30pm, then how come there was yet *another* apparently successful PING at 2:30am which was noted in the HLN special Down the Hill (avail on YouTube)??
RL Warrant can be read here:
Info on Broadcastify for those who may be interested:
Broadcastify Official Mobile Applications
www.broadcastify.com
https://www.facebook.com/KingsCrossBritishShop?__tn__=<*F
