Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by 0101ABA, Feb 22, 2017.
I am not a fan of hers either but in the interview I watched Sgt Slocum say it directly to her.
I went down the rabbit hole of researching property. I am not going to directly link, but will provide the website where one can search for his records: https://beacon.schneidercorp.com/Application.aspx?AppID=377&LayerID=5553&PageTypeID=2&PageID=2976
Searching his name will provide 4 results and you can look at each to obtain more information.
Interesting. Heard a radio report just now in Indiana on the search of RL's property. They said it came from new developments uncovered by the Carroll County sheriffs office, not from ISP or FBI. Carroll County Sheriff had custody of RL, so IMO he gave them something.
"The search warrant is for the whole property, so we can go anywhere we want and look for whatever we need to look for," Riley said."
He might be completely innocent and he might be completely guilty. But I'm a lawyer, and while I don't do much criminal law, I'm pretty sure the first thing I would say about any client was that he was completely innocent. So his lawyer is certainly not an unbiased party.
Thank you. I've been following this investigation but haven't been reading here at WS. Don't know all the shorthand for this case yet.
Why did they wait so long to search his place?
Wouldn't that Be the first place to search?
They were found on his land.
Did he refuse to a search?
So, they aren't calling him a suspect. (Unless they're calling him a suspect.)
It doesn't really seem very intuitive to search the property owned by the man where the bodies are found. It seems like the first thing that should have been done, actually, not something they do over a month later.
Or something kept in a silo.
Or he could have had a passenger.
Driving drunk with a passenger. When it is a child in the car they add endangering a child to the DUI charges.
This would mean, if true, that LE had listened to Libby's audio (or video) by Monday, February 13, at 6:30 p.m. in order to ask RL to say, "down the hill." I thought the girls were reported missing at 5:30 pm on Monday. What gives?
How did he get back & forth to Lafayette if he wasn't supposed to be driving?
Are you going to explain your position or is that it? I firmly believe that any evidence they find during this search warrant would be incredibly difficult to prosecute anyone with.... This crime happened over a month ago anyone could have planted evidence on his property.. do I believe that happened no but prove it didnt... and any good lawyer good easily make that argument.
Yes, thats what makes me go hmmmm.. he gives tons of interviews..he is quite the chatty fellow. He talks originally to LE without council.. now he decides to shut up
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Most lawyers do not ask their clients if they are guilty, IMO.
I do not. As for the other scenario in my head...a dead ringer. I am just waiting to see if it plays out or not.
I agree with you, When he was giving his interview, the video and audio clips had not yet been released. Maybe even not yet found. Then the snowball starts rolling down the hill. mo
It would be admissible. Absolutely, without a doubt, admissible. Whether it would create a reasonable doubt in the eyes of a jury, is hard to say without the exact circumstances of its discovery, etc...
I'm a second year law student, so this is my educated opinion.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk