Kidnapping and/or pedophila were not Ricci's MO.
When he shot at the police officer, he was most likely on drugs. Thus the short sentence.
He was a not-too-swift thief and cat burglar. The threesome's take from the bank was around $1700.
The State of Utah v. Richard Albert Ricci, Salt Lake City Police Department, Agency Case No. 01-59273, defendant "exercised unauthorized control over the property of Sue Ann Adams with the purpose to deprive the owner thereof, and that the value of said property is or exceeds $300, but is less than $1,000."
Four witnesses: S. Adams, L. Linh, R. Lewis, and T. Siebert. There were also witnesses to the bank robbery.
The Jeep has, to date, yielded no DNA evidence of Elizabeth being in the vehicle. If the Jeep was loaned out, that person's DNA would be in it. If Moul vacuumed the interior, the debris would be in the vacuum's bag, and forensics would have examined it.
What does this mean? Ricci was wearing a mask. He brandished his small handgun in the air and threatened to take a woman hostage.
The Jeep has, to date, yielded no DNA evidence of Elizabeth being in the vehicle. If the Jeep was loaned out, that person's DNA would be in it. If Moul vacuumed the interior, the debris would be in the vacuum's bag, and forensics would have examined it.
So you don't think he had anything to hide? Then why wouldn't he admit he had the Jeep, tell police where it had been, tell police what he did with the things he took out of it, and tell police who picked him up at Mouls? These are the key questions to the case, lakey, and if Ricci had answered them off the bat he would have gone home exonerated and the police may never have known about Remington and the bank robbery. Obviously, for whatever reason (denial, naivete, or dishonesty) lakey, you refuse to address this issue of why Ricci wouldn't answer these questions from the police because your complete mindset is to exonerate Ricci at any cost. Are you going to tell me again all Caucasians look alike to Moul?