Kell1...yep "something they can't get past to link them to the crime." Hmmm, I am thinking a relative who would go to their grave protecting the secrets of their child/spouse (ie provided an alibi or refuse to speak with LE.) Or, some really clever high tec whiz who put his phone on call forwarding so actual location would be impossible to prove? Or leave their cell phone in one location and use a "cloned burner phone" that simultaneously received same info.Pertaining to attention seeking, that was what i was referring to .
In some cases offenders inject themselves into the investigation in order, to gain information, he may have attempted to do that , but theres zero indication of anyone contacting police to taunt, or claim responsibility for thes 2 murders.
Carters statement is most likely pertaining to this fact.
And i 100% believe this individual was interviewed, they usually are withing the first 2 weeks , but theres something that they cant get past to link them to the crime .
I remember a case a long time ago in which police were able to clone the number on a pager and followed a suspect. Other thoughts (swirling all the time) if this was about cell phone/internet stuff...only one victim possessed a cell phone right? Then it would stand, if a meet up was planned, the attacker did not expect the second victim. Were the victims "treated" differently? Was the purpose to silence victim(?) , sexually assault victim (?) or avoidance of being exposed as a perv? How far would a desperate "pedo" go to protect their reputation, job, spouse, family etc. ??
Maybe that is how the killer can justify or live with this... a it was a "them or me scenario." In his selfish, self-centered mind, exposure was a fate worse than death.
*** Life is precious and no one had the right to take those young lives.***