The Bard wrote:
You're assuming they were not smoking throughout the time they were being questioned by police. I suspect they continued to smoke after the crime and in between questioning. I'd be extremely surprised if they hadn't.
I assumed that because they never blamed drugs for their behavior during the questioning (bad Bard, you're giving them ideas!). If they never claimed to have been high, then they can't use drug-induced confusion as an excuse, so that gets excluded as a justification by default. Also, I don't remember reading any statements from police that they seemed high during the questioning.
Obviously, I have no way of knowing if they smoked or not. Sure they could have, but I'm thinking they might have been afraid to given the circumstances.
Oh they both admitted it... but it was only one
Of course RS swore off smoking forever... how curious if only one or two unaltered joints.
I think both probably thought they might be tested too (they even may have known how long cocaine takes to get out of the system) so they admitted the smoking because the test at best would have been about 4 days later. IMO opinion, I think maybe pot, cocaine and drinking were involved.
She is lying about what time they ate dinner and had the water leak, or she can't remember cleary... cause she never looks at clock OR her phone.
They are lying about what they did that night, or neither can properly remember
Why would AK lie about what time they ate if RS's father had called much earlier and RS had told him they had just clean up afterwards? Was she not there, or smoking/showering/other and didn't know of the call?
Why did they not take the planned trip that MORNING... has that ever been asked of the pair?
Was it a lie about RS possibly bloody hands cleaning fish... did AK administer aid or just keep playing her guitar?
Does anyone think it is possible the appeal judges/jurors did not even consider the phone and computer evidence? It seems either thrown out, not looked at, or ignored... this is another massive evidence group along with the staging IMO.
Any evidence of cleaning/staging/altering speaks highly of their involvement.
There is absolutely no decent excuse for the AKdna/MKblood mix in Filomena's room or in the bathroom. Did the judges/jurors get to see/hear the 'bathmat boogie' explanation, along with prancing naked from bathroom to room with a swinging unlocked front door? Would these be put in the column of being immature? What could possibly be a reason for her lamp to be in the murder room, and why/how could she not notice it missing? She noticed the blood, she noticed locked door, she notice the poo, she notice the broken window in Filomena's room (oops, didn't tell RS).
She notice the ransacking, and checked for her laptop... but doesn't notice her lamp missing or
need the bathroom or any light in her room? Does that sound reasonable to most people??? Would you shower naked ladies/girls on an at least cool Nov morning? Would the blood you noticed have come from your ears, you mention RS cleaning them, yet they probably were not injured... your not sure??? Is mentioning that a way to explain the missing looking ear hole? Is mentioning the bathmat boogie a way to explain were the partial footprints and blood spots leading to the bathmat disappeared to? Did you boogie down the hall to knock on Meredith's door? Did you call her phones from outside to see if you could hear them? Would you not turn on ANY lights?
Why did karateboy fail at breaking down the door... not too worried or too worried about being sued? Why would AK go outside to peek into Meredith's room, instead of using the call one of her phones method?
So IMO they show blatant lying, or severe memory loss due to consuming something(s)... or BOTH.
Although I don't like the Mail, it's piece in there today with Patrick calling AK a consumate actress was interesting.
Actress/pretending to be something else... isn't that about it?
Facial expressions and 'acting' devastated might come in handy... oh, it did.