[ Home | Contents ]
Time: 9:53:50 AM
Maggie, This is interesting.
So the killer just HAD to be injured in such a fight?
Funny how that changed later--to a quick, fight where the killer didn't even have blood on him?
Also, if the killer just HAD to be injured how is it that the ONLY injury that is "found" is an injury where the "killer" cuts himself with his own weapon? No bruises or any other injuries?
I was always amazed at how this killing of two people--violently and with much fighting and struggle morphed into a "quick kill" later. Where the killer wasn't injured basically (except for a cut he did himself somehow) and didn't get any blood on himself??
And I DO remember (not 10 inches--I thought it was less than 2 ft but I'm not arguing about memory) that the round drops could only have been dropped from a low distance. Two feet or 10 inches---somebody was going around like ape man with his arms much longer than his knees to drop this blood.
The First thought in my head had I been there was that someone dripped blood from a LONG knife. Not that they were bleeding from a wound gotten in the fight.
Also, a nurse called in to E! one day and talked of working in the ER and how it was standard that when they left ER after a very bloody patient that every step they made "threw" blood all over the hallway and walls(from their bloody clothes) and that it took a good 20 minute shower--perhaps more than one--to get the blood off their bodies.
I find it nothing short of a "miracle" that only 5 drops of blood are found as the "killer" walks away from the scene. Don't you? charlie