UVA student missing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The hamstring thing suggests he didn't have a sense of other people's strength/vulnerability. If he overwhelmed her without intent to harm her, that would explain why he went to the police. And the lawyer told him it would be hard to defend, and thus he bolted. My theory.

I disagree. I think he had a very good sense of other people's strength and vulnerability. This is a guy who lifted patients for a living. I think his massive size coupled with his own insecurities explains his behavior. I think he also hates women, especially since a woman got him thrown out of college. It's weird that we haven't heard from any former girlfriends. Seems like a loner and/or serial rapist or worse to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they had DNA evidence that tied him to other murders or rapes, would they have announced that already?

You mean let JM's lawyer know. No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The starting point for JM's lawyer is not to talk. If down the road they decide the evidence is likely to produce a conviction he could talk as part of a plea deal, such as to avoid the death penalty. If they tie him to other murders or if they find her body, I doubt there would be any kind of plea deal.

If JM's lawyer heard from JM that she was alive when last he saw her, then he would advise JM to talk. Therefore, she was last seen dead by JM.

[Anonymous]

Could you guys stop with the ASD and spectrum discussion? It really derails any logical discussion. And nobody has any evidence of his neurological or mental health status. His criminal record speaks for itself. He's got issues. I get that this is an anonymous thread where all kinds of speculation can occur, but really some of the stuff that is getting introduced here is beyond belief.

[Anonymous]

Sorry if this has already been addressed but I find it confusing that a guy who seems like such a bumbling idiot in bOth the video of him in TX and the timeline could hide a body so well that the police/dogs/entire community can't find it after weeks of searching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could you guys stop with the ASD and spectrum discussion? It really derails any logical discussion. And nobody has any evidence of his neurological or mental health status. His criminal record speaks for itself. He's got issues. I get that this is an anonymous thread where all kinds of speculation can occur, but really some of the stuff that is getting introduced here is beyond belief.

Agree. Really annoying in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The starting point for JM's lawyer is not to talk. If down the road they decide the evidence is likely to produce a conviction he could talk as part of a plea deal, such as to avoid the death penalty. If they tie him to other murders or if they find her body, I doubt there would be any kind of plea deal.

If JM's lawyer heard from JM that she was alive when last he saw her, then he would advise JM to talk. Therefore, she was last seen dead by JM.

I now know that you are clueless about how attorneys interact with their clients in criminal cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could you guys stop with the ASD and spectrum discussion? It really derails any logical discussion. And nobody has any evidence of his neurological or mental health status. His criminal record speaks for itself. He's got issues. I get that this is an anonymous thread where all kinds of speculation can occur, but really some of the stuff that is getting introduced here is beyond belief.

People had stopped discussing it until you resurrected the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry if this has already been addressed but I find it confusing that a guy who seems like such a bumbling idiot in bOth the video of him in TX and the timeline could hide a body so well that the police/dogs/entire community can't find it after weeks of searching.

It's a huge area to cover so I am not surprised. You don't need to be a genius, you just need time and open space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The hamstring thing suggests he didn't have a sense of other people's strength/vulnerability. If he overwhelmed her without intent to harm her, that would explain why he went to the police. And the lawyer told him it would be hard to defend, and thus he bolted. My theory.

A lawyer would never tell him in an initial conversation that it would be difficult to defend. The lawyer hasn't seen the evidence and has no idea if it will be difficult or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they had DNA evidence that tied him to other murders or rapes, would they have announced that already?

No. They have no obligation to "announce" evidence to the general public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The starting point for JM's lawyer is not to talk. If down the road they decide the evidence is likely to produce a conviction he could talk as part of a plea deal, such as to avoid the death penalty. If they tie him to other murders or if they find her body, I doubt there would be any kind of plea deal.

If JM's lawyer heard from JM that she was alive when last he saw her, then he would advise JM to talk. Therefore, she was last seen dead by JM.

Big assumption that JM would confess to his lawyer -- unlikely -- and even more that they have had a substantive conversation already.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why this thread hasn't been moved to Off Topics. It ceased being about UVA a long time ago, and is now about amateur sleuthing and amateur lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hamstring thing suggests he didn't have a sense of other people's strength/vulnerability. If he overwhelmed her without intent to harm her, that would explain why he went to the police. And the lawyer told him it would be hard to defend, and thus he bolted. My theory.

A lawyer would never tell him in an initial conversation that it would be difficult to defend. The lawyer hasn't seen the evidence and has no idea if it will be difficult or not.

+1

It is amazing how much erroneous information is being posted on the legal aspects of the case.

As far as I know, although counsel has been retained there is no indication as to whether he has had any substantive discussion with the defendant.

[Anonymous]

I am pretty sure that I read that JM requested a lawyer but did not actually talk to him at the police station, then got in the car and sped away. Not really sure how he could hire a lawyer without talking to him, but I did not get the impression that he had really consulted with the lawyer on substantive issues before fleeing.