Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: focus
So, he was not being held illegally.

I agree with that. But there are many felons who break the same kinds of rules who are not thrown back in the slammer. I think it was drinking and associating with other felons that put Richard back in the state prison. Of course they could have booked him into the county jail for suspicion of burglary, theft, and bank robbery. They had plenty of cause to lock him up. The parole violations were the easiest route to get him back behind bars. At the state prison they could question him at length about the abduction. At first I don't even think he had his lawyer present. Maybe some legal expert can explain what his rights were in this situation. Anyway, it is obvious from all that we know that he would never answer questions about the Jeeps whereabouts while it was out of the garage.

73 posted on 08/30/2002 11:00:09 PM PDT by sandude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: sandude
agree with that. But there are many felons who break the same kinds of rules who are not thrown back in the slammer.

We all need to remember that LE had absolutely NO evidence or witnesses to associate Ricci with Elizabeth's disappearance.

I'm beginning to wonder if the Smart brothers didn't steer LE to Ricci from the beginning, despite how they strongly backed away publicly from declaring him a suspect in the beginning. Was that a sham?

76 posted on 08/30/2002 11:06:58 PM PDT by varina davis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson