I agree with you analysis--and this was a message board posting. However, Kim has lied so many times, I question everything she says. If the girls in fact did not know each other where was Kim driving her? If they were seperated, why wait for the drunken girl? If she was concerned about her why not call 911 herself--did she need the security guard? Was she going to dump her in the parking lot? As we've been saying for days, Ms Kim has the answers..but can she tell the truth?
This will go against the conventional thinking here, but I don't think Kim is lying about the facts of the case in her recent interviews. I think a lot of people are not paying very close attention to her actual words. I think she is trying to be misleading, but without being caught in an outright lie.
It's true Kim lied in the first 911 call. She also lied to the security guard at Kroger.
But there was little downside to what she did at the time - she wanted to sic the police on the boys without personally getting involved with the police, and later she wanted to dump Kim onto someone else (the Kroger guard) and wash her hands of the AV and go home. She wasn't in those instances giving false testimony on penalty of perjury.
But there is a big risk to Kim if she is caught in an out-and-out lie in this criminal rape case which has attracted huge attention. I think she is taking care, with her lawyer, to make sure that whatever she says in the news interviews will not be contrary to what her testimony will eventually be.
Listening carefully to what Kim says, she actually does not dispute the boys' version as to any hard facts. And if she is pressed to say something that conficts with the boys' version ("Can you confirm you were NOT in the bathroom with the AV?) she refuses to speak on that.
She says the boys are lying as to whether the AV was drunk when she arrived. Well, whether someone believes another person is under the influence is a matter of opinion in many cases. It's clear the AV was able to walk into the house under her own power, and start the routine. So if the other people at the party have a different opinion of whether the AV is drunk, so what? Kim can reasonably pretend that she thought the AV was not drunk. Kim is not in danger of being caught in a lie, because that is a matter of opinion.
Kim says the boys are lying when they say they slipped a "$100 bill" under the door of the bathroom. (By the way, she is implicitly placing herself in the bathroom by making this statement.) But the boys have said they slipped money under the door. Maybe it was $20 bills. They didn't say it was $100 bill. Kim may be misleading people here, but if the boys are able to prove somehow that they slipped $20 bills under the door, well Kim is still not caught in an outright lie.
Some people on here were under the impression that Kim said the two women immediately left the house together after they stopped their routine, but in fact a close listening to her interview reveals that she did not say that.
Some people on here thought that Kim said the two women were coaxed back into the house. Again, listening closely to the interview, she does not say that.
So I think it is worth paying close attention to Kim where she does in fact speak to her knowledge of the hard facts of the case. And so far, I haven't heard her contradict the defense version on these hard facts.