To: CAPPSMADNESS
she was naked, that certainly indicates a sexual motive. no tattered PJ's anyplace near where she was found. this is a horrible, horrible crime.
To: contessa machiaveli
She also showed telling signs of ongoing abuse..from pictures, videos, and from journal entries in diaries...are you POSITIVE that nothing happened to her from within the safety of her own home? As mentioned earlier..this is a very detailed and complicated case..the emotional response like you are having is understandable...but you need to know more about the "family" and their extended friends...incredible AMORAL folk...
56 posted on
08/07/2002 8:24:54 PM PDT by
FresnoDA
To: contessa machiaveli
you are reaching - no PJ's could mean simply that her clothing was removed because they may/may not have contained evidence. Or maybe she never had pj's on at all - all we have are the parents word as to what she supposedly wore that night. And no pj's were ever found.
To: contessa machiaveli
she was naked, that certainly indicates a sexual motive.There was also no indication of truma, or evidence that she was bound with rope or anything else. Exactly how did he keep that girl so quiet and out of his hair as he traveled around the country side? How did the rape of a 7 year old girl leave so little evidence? He did not bleach or steam clean his motor home as the media loves to report. He didn't even wipe it down.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson