I've interviewed probably a thousand criminals over the years for all sorts of crimes ( murder to hit and run car accidents), and some universal rules apply.
They never give up everything on the first interview. It is usually all a pack of lies directed at placing the blame on someone or something else.
Second interviews usually result in half truths and partial disclosures designed to minimize the suspects involvement with whatever they are involved in so they get a reduced charge or witness protection.
Third interviews usually give you complete disclosure, but you never know all the details unless forensics proves them for you.
I've never known one criminal suspect to freely confess everything they did and go into exact detail.
I've been surfing this morning and noted two stories that apply to her arrest:
1) increased awareness of the US -Mexico border as a path of infiltration by large numbers of Al Qaeda operatives
2) her disclosures of pending attacks and plans.
I dont think there has been time to completely drag everything out of her, nor do I think she knows it all.
Hope that helps
Yes, that helps a lot.
Excellent synopsis and most assuredly accurate. IMHO usually there are other people involved or knowledgeable from the criminal end. My questions, who was her contact here and where are they?