The prevailing theory has nothing to do with TT and DA being into one another, so I'm not sure where you're getting that.
It is pretty popular in the comments about the case. Not here and not recently, but as far as there is any extended context delivered as to why the person thinks that's the most likely theory, it tends to go back to that. Usually there is nothing and it's implied that it's obvious why.
I believe that DA claimed to be at the house on Minot—sleeping late, as I recall—so she didn't necessarily lie about her whereabouts. She may have lied about other things.
I was referring to her claim that CA didn't gave TT any rides cause he was taking cancer treatment at home.
It isn't known whether FA lied, but I suspect that she did.
VI mentioned here that she was telling different stories over the years. Claims by press also varied a bit but that could be the matter of misreporting. Considering that she really was at the workshop, with TT whole day isn't supporting theory with TT being responsible.
No one has ever accused TM of lying.
Not true, unless theorising that he may "have something to do with it" or be responsible for the girls disappearance doesn't count as implying that he lied.
You're probably right as far as the technicalities go, I wrongly assumed that he was one of VI here and explained CJG situation here, it could be on the website that's not allowed to quote here.
It seems like you are trying to diminish the prevailing theory by completely misstating many of its elements and then attacking those misstated elements. I think they call that a straw-man argument.
I wasn't attacking any misstated elements.
I listed those:
- DA and TT were still into each other, supported by the fact that they had relationship before TT married Rachel,
- CJG was with the girls, despite of his best friend, Renee's bf denying that he was with them when they left to the Army Navy - so relying on the statement from the record store employee, who thought that he may saw Rachel and Julie in distance, possibly being in company of some guy,
- DA lied about her whereabouts, TT lied, FA lied, and TM was also lying and CJG was also lying, so pretty much nobody's credible but record store clerk,
- TT was, at the age of 21 capable of triple murder of minors, disposing of their bodies, getting alibi and acting like nothing happened afterwards.
Not as facts, but as explanation of what I got out of the reasoning behind theory with TT being the perp. And that's why I said
"as far as I understand" and not
"the facts are" or "
those who find the theory with TT being responsible are saying the following things".
But that prevailing theory is, as far as I understand based on assumption that:
And that's because I really don't understand what makes it the most popular theory - if not misstated facts.
I respect your opinion on the subject, I'd like to understand it better, but those are still two different things to me:
1. Specific person's theory/opinion and reasons what made them come to those conclusions (so for example yours)
and
2. Majority of those concerned with the case coming to same conclusion and seeing it as the most likely theory, despite of various sources telling quite different stories about the case.
Not saying that it couldn't happen. But I'm either consistently failing to see how that adds up (and I'd be seriously grateful for pointing out what makes this theory look most likely), or - IMO - the reason why this is prevailing theory is that most people wondering what could happen are fed with the scenario where it is, indeed, the most likely.
So... full confidence in accuracy of record store sighting, and assumption that all those closest to the case are either lying or mistaken?
I think they call that a straw-man argument.
Straw-man argument does not include straw-argument maker to state their confusion about what the arguments actually are. Maybe I shouldn't made those guesses so bluntly, but you said that it is the prevailing theory.
And I agree that it is, but as I said: I don't understand why.
Apparently we disagree on the part with popularity of the theorised relationship between TT and DA.
I can understand your theory and your reasoning.
But still, what's really in there that makes majority of people come to same conclusion.
The fact that girls could pick CJG or someone else while doing their trip to the mall cause if they did, TT could learn about this, could get jealous, could feel furious, could act on it, could go to far with it and could find himself in perfect circumstances that allowed him to rid of the whitnesses.
It's okay as one person's theory.
But to make sense as majority's theory isn't that a bit too much of theoretically possible events following itself?
And I'm not saying it's not a valid theory, but I fail to see how majority of people could come to same conclusion - apart from relying on stories with specific narrative - cause either:
a) I'm (as I mentioned above) completely unable to see the reasons why,
b) it is a main theory cause majority of those finding it the most accurate relied on opinions about the story, not on the story to came up with their theories.
VI stated many times, here, that all certaintity about girls whereabouts and actions ends with them leaving Army Navy Store.
There were tree possible sightings mentioned publicly:
- one reported years after the disappearance,
- one allegedly provided by an older woman who was never interviewed about it or identified, reported by the clerk from one of the stores,
- one from record store clerk who claimed that the girls may be in company of a guy, with no further details provided.
Average person is likely aware that "it's usually the spouse".
But we're talking about 21yo guy with no widely available reports of acts of violence commited before or after the disappearance.
