Premeditation does not mean thinking about it as you are doing it. Premeditation requires thinking about it at a previous time. The fact that both these actions did actually kill her (head bash, ligature) cannot be considered in court as evidence that the perp INTENDED to kill her. I know that this seems obvious to many people, but the DA had to view this case as a lawyer would, and that is very different. The police are not lawyers, but the DA is. That is why there is sometimes a conflict when the police want charges to be filed and the DA balks. Examples of premeditation would be attempting to hire someone to kill, setting up a false alibi, or shopping for bleach and rope and tarps (like Scott Peterson). Taking out an insurance policy is also another clue. And of course, incriminating phone calls, texts, e-mails. None of these were evident in the R case. We do know that one of the Rs purchased items, matching exactly in price and department to the duct tape and cord, at a local hardware store in town (McGuckin's) a few weeks before. BUT the store's register system shows ONLY the price and department on the register tape, NOT the actual item. Newer systems show the item, like going to Shop Rite and the register tape shows "quart of milk" or "diet Coke". The older systems only showed price and department (like "produce" or "meats" or "dairy", etc.) The McGuckin's tape only showed a general department, like "hardware", or "paints" or "outdoor", or "plumbing", that type of thing. So there was no way to PROVE beyond a doubt that the two items purchased were, in FACT, the tape and cord. To do that, there would have to be a TRIAL and a McGuckin's employee would have to be questioned on the witness stand as to whether ONLY the tape and cord were sold at that specific price in that specific department or if other items were sold at those prices as well. There was a LOT that could have been questioned or clarified at a trial- and as we know, there was no trial.