The police have all of Moul's records.
What is it about Ricci that you so tenaciously defend him when there is statistically no doubt he lied to the police about the Jeep. What is it that makes you in 'complete' denial, unable to even entertain the possibility of what to the serious posters on this thread and the authorities is blindingly obvious.
Why do you keep saying there were witnesses to Ricci's breakin of the Smart neighbors, no one saw him. The person he aroused in the bedroom he stole from thought he was a member of the family. Why do you make things like this up?
Get it straight, Sherl, please. I never said there were witnesses to Ricci "breaking into" the Adams home. But on the Third District Court District Attorney David E. Yocom's DAO #02012784 list of Counts against Ricci, is gives: THIS INFORMATION IS BASED ON EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES: s. Adams, L. Linh, R. Lewis, and T. Siebert. Siebert is a detective on SLCPD. This was a .pdf file.
Statistics? If you want to speak of statistics, then you would have to look further into the Smart family, for sexual child abuse is most often committed by a member of the family.
I guess you have no other way to keep this board going than to accuse me of defending Ricci. Defending him is quite different than demanding evidence that he is guilty, which is what I have done.
We have heard Moul comment on Ricci and the Jeep on t.v. We do not know what he told the police - and most importantly, we do not know what questions the police asked him.