Quote:
Originally Posted by revots33
Reasons for why a line on a form might be dated 11/3 instead of 11/5 range from the mundane and boring to the exciting and criminal. They have been discussed itt already. You simply choose to ignore the mundane and boring possibilities because they don't fit with your narrative.
As for the 22 calls, the possibilities also range from the mundane (he was helping to coordinate search parties, etc.), to Hollywood-thriller type intrigue (cops were instructing him on where and when to plant the body and car of the woman he had murdered). I don't need to ask if you find the more mundane explanations any more believable than the B-movie ones. Pretty obvious boring answers don't work for you.
Seems that Zellner's strategy is to drag Hillegas through the mud and try to brand him a murderer. Who cares that there is zero proof he had anything to do with it? Unfounded suspicion is enough for the internet detective squad. Besides, he dared to still be friends with an ex-gf... we all know that means he's really a murderer, don't we?
Hopefully Zellner gets sued for libel when all this is done and SA is still rotting in jail where he belongs.
You have it backwards: you are ignoring the "mundane."
The evidence log has the Rav4 going into police custody on Nov. 3. Accepting the date at face value is the "mundane" option.
Without any evidence to the contrary (and I asked you, and you confirmed you do not have any) you claim the date is in error.
So, who is doing what again?
Why would you assume that a document produced by a police department that presumably would be doing the same type of action over and over, every day, would be in error, especially where there is no evidence of an error?
As for "no evidence" RH is involved in any way? Are you kidding?
1. ex boyfriend;
2. stays in constant contact with TH - quite obvious he wants to get back together with her;
3. Quite obvious she does not want to get back together - she even lives with another man (no relationship between them, but still);
4. Someone has been harassing TH with telephone calls and texts (her boss testified to that);
5. RH saw her the day before she disappeared and knew her plans;
6. RH accessed her VM and computer using passwords he "guessed."
7. Apparently, there are 22 phone calls between Ryan and the sheriff's dept. on Nov. 3. Why is Ryan involved at at all? Why aren't those calls between the sheriff and TH's brother (for example) - even the roommate would seem a better candidate.
8. Ryan, without anyone requesting him to do so, organizes a search party (why he would be particularly qualified for this is anyone's guess since RH is not from around SA's area);
9. The person Ryan gives instructions to and a camera finds the RAV4 inside of 20 minutes of the search on SA's property.
10. Footage of RH carefully weighing and answering the question from the reporter about being on SA's property.
11. Ryan's demeanor at trial.
- I'm sure there are more as this is off the top of my head, but you get the idea. That you made the claims you do regarding RH show bias in the most extreme.
*** With that list above, considering the discussion about a conspiracy to frame SA, you think RH should not have even been interviewed as a potential suspect? I sure do.