Photo of the (Nissan) car interior - https://twitter.com/jacelarson/status/519622057391173635
To be honest, the evidence as has been presented in media so far indicates that lj is guilty of multiple things. He had a lot of support from folks in cville so it's really sad to see this unfolding!! I am sure I have angered my nephew for any thoughts that LJ could be guilty... but the picture being painted is horrible. Having spent 28 years and Cville and seeing young woman after young woman disappearing, it will be a relief if the perp is stopped... even if that person is lj.
Do we know what kind of job he had between 2003 and the two hospital jobs? I keep thinking he was in construction or painting... Something where you would travel to different locations. Augusta Lumber is owned by someone with the last name carr but I don't think they are related.
There's been a lot of discussion here on whether it was, or was not, DNA that LE was referring to regarding JM's link to MH and the Fairfax rape. I for one, have thought from the moment they said forensic evidence that it was something scientifically "provable", but I just now went and looked up the legal definition of "forensic evidence":
" Forensic evidence is evidence obtained by scientific methods such as ballistics, blood test, and DNA test and used in court. Forensic evidence often helps to establish the guilt or innocence of possible suspects. Analysis of forensic evidence is used in the investigation and prosecution of civil as well as criminal proceedings. Forensic evidence can be used to link crimes that are thought to be related to one another...."
From http://definitions.uslegal.com/f/forensic-evidence/
Seems to me that whatever forensic evidence they have is provable and usable in court to link JM to MH and Fairfax rape. JMO.
The FBI says that it was DNA that linked the MH case to the Fairfax case:
http://www.fbi.gov/washingtondc/pre...dia-campaign-in-morgan-harrington-murder-case
http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/201...an-harrington-killer/morgan-harrington_060412
So now, the question is - is that DNA in fact JM's?
Likely, LE is lying low about the 2005 rape case until they get a direct hit with the DNA taken directly from JM which would be evidence needed to go after him. I have no idea what is needed to secure a rape conviction when the victim is alive but not around, as might be the case with that woman who was raped. She might refuse to resurrect the case, and I've read that she isn't even in this country anymore. As for what they have to link with MH., LE isn't saying. When they end searching for Hannah, with or without success, they will have to procede with the charges against JM there. Levying charges, means setting a timer and things have to get rolling when they do so. With no Hannah, and not much evidence beyond what we know, nothing defintive, in a few months when things settle down a bit, the situation might look quite different for JM.
Pah. I'm willing to bet that LE finds some evidence of Hannah in that car or on JM's clothes. I have no doubt that she was in the car. But so what? She left the mall with him, and I think it's a foregone conclusion she got into his car. No crime to hook up with her at the mall. Pretty much proof positive, she was not fighting him, was willingly with him. Plenty of witnesses for that. So she's not looking so good, looking sick, place closing down, car right there, sure he took her to the car. I don't think that helps one bit to place her in the car. So he drove her to that address and dropped her off. Or any other story, Or no story at all. You can't just make up a story and make it stick without proof when there are so many other alternatives that are possible.
If like the AM case, clear signs of struggle, injury, like blood are found, that's a whole other story, but I don't think LE is going to be any further ahead of the game in being able to simply prove she was in the car. I'm surprised they got a search warrent for it just with that.
Time. Defense usually loves time. If they don't have Hannah by then, search is off by then, it's the holidays, news is older and they can push things back and slow things down even more. With some luck another girl goes missing in a similar mode. What else is JM supposed to do anyways He might as well hunker down and enjoy his vacation in a cell.
There's been a lot of discussion here on whether it was, or was not, DNA that LE was referring to regarding JM's link to MH and the Fairfax rape. I for one, have thought from the moment they said forensic evidence that it was something scientifically "provable", but I just now went and looked up the legal definition of "forensic evidence":
" Forensic evidence is evidence obtained by scientific methods such as ballistics, blood test, and DNA test and used in court. Forensic evidence often helps to establish the guilt or innocence of possible suspects. Analysis of forensic evidence is used in the investigation and prosecution of civil as well as criminal proceedings. Forensic evidence can be used to link crimes that are thought to be related to one another...."
From http://definitions.uslegal.com/f/forensic-evidence/
Seems to me that whatever forensic evidence they have is provable and usable in court to link JM to MH and Fairfax rape. JMO.
But that is just it, there are not plenty of witnesses. We have the guy on the tape, who claimed he saw them with together with JMs arm around her, but just ahead of her was another woman with similar hair and similar dress who DID have a guy with his arm around her. How sure can we be that WG didn't just get them mixed up? After all he did apparently give an incorrect description initially. Then there is the mystery person in the bar, but no one else in the bar apparently saw them together, plus they apparently did see another woman there with a similar description. Finally, there is the door person, who found JM noteworthy enough initially when he was outside, but not noteworthy enough to remember when he came back in a few minutes later (and he did come back in), and then a short while afterwards, noteworthy enough again to see him walk buy on the street.
So there are a lot of holes in these witness accounts. Do these people really remember anything about that night accurately at all? To make the assumption that she left in his car implies that you have to accept that these accounts are accurate, and I am not sure that they are. If you remove their accounts form the equation, then you are left with JM walking by her on the street, and JM buying some drinks in the restaurant, but not much else to suggest involvement of the car.