Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The evidence they have against him is circumstantial. There is no camera footage of her getting in the car with him. It doesn't take a lot to meet the probable cause evidence test to be able to charge someone. They charged him with that so that they would be able to arrest him and then have him held without bond. The reckless driving charges would not have been enough to keep him held with no bond.
I hope all the people who are assuming he is guilty have to come face to face with the justice system one day and then suddenly remember that in this country we are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and not the other way around.
True, but his ACTIONS lead many to believe that he is guilty of something. Why run if you have nothing to hide?
Because the police think you are a (serial) murderer. You guys have already decided he's guilty. He probably thinks he has no chance if he didn't do it.
OMG seriously? He looks guilty bc he didn't come forward initially and he ran. If he hadn't done those things, he'd have much more of a chance in the court of public opinion. Why is that so hard to understand?
Anonymous wrote:The police want to talk to him. He wouldn't talk before so they had to exert pressure. It's a no-brainer. Wake me when the cops release ANY evidence that he did anything.
Anonymous wrote:Just curious if those who are reminding us that yes, he is innocent until proven guilty were as vehement on this point regarding the Ruth ann lodato suspect?
Anonymous wrote:I'm still betting he has a history of using the date-rape drugs and/or they found some in his apartment or car. I still don't think he intended to kill HG, but I wouldn't be surprised if he drugged her and killed her "accidentally" (from the drug interaction with the alcohol or other medicines/drugs in her system) while assaulting her.
He doesn't fit the profile of a maniacal killer, but he sure doesn't fit the profile of an innocent man.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The evidence they have against him is circumstantial. There is no camera footage of her getting in the car with him. It doesn't take a lot to meet the probable cause evidence test to be able to charge someone. They charged him with that so that they would be able to arrest him and then have him held without bond. The reckless driving charges would not have been enough to keep him held with no bond.
I hope all the people who are assuming he is guilty have to come face to face with the justice system one day and then suddenly remember that in this country we are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and not the other way around.
True, but his ACTIONS lead many to believe that he is guilty of something. Why run if you have nothing to hide?
Because the police think you are a (serial) murderer. You guys have already decided he's guilty. He probably thinks he has no chance if he didn't do it.
OMG seriously? He looks guilty bc he didn't come forward initially and he ran. If he hadn't done those things, he'd have much more of a chance in the court of public opinion. Why is that so hard to understand?
Anonymous wrote:Why make up a story about how sad and unfair life is for this criminal? This time he got caught. No he has not been tried yet, but it seems like there is a lot of evidence. At a certain point it is hard to argue that he is the innocent victim.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The evidence they have against him is circumstantial. There is no camera footage of her getting in the car with him. It doesn't take a lot to meet the probable cause evidence test to be able to charge someone. They charged him with that so that they would be able to arrest him and then have him held without bond. The reckless driving charges would not have been enough to keep him held with no bond.
I hope all the people who are assuming he is guilty have to come face to face with the justice system one day and then suddenly remember that in this country we are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and not the other way around.
True, but his ACTIONS lead many to believe that he is guilty of something. Why run if you have nothing to hide?
Because the police think you are a (serial) murderer. You guys have already decided he's guilty. He probably thinks he has no chance if he didn't do it.
Agreed. This whole "poor black man, felt like society wouldn't treat him fairly so he ran" - BULL. No one is denying that blacks can get treated worse than whites in our justice system. But the majority of people arrested for a crime committed it. And if he were white and the last one seen with her, and ran, the manhunt would have been just as publicized etc.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Honestly, if this guy was white, I don't think we would be hearing some many speeches about how the police are looking to railroad someone. Something to think about. Frankly, the fact that a few posters seem to think nothing about the rights of the victim but are all a tither if anyone suggests that the suspect has done anything wrong is disturbing.
A PP here. I think that a lot of people (White people) in this thread are missing the point that some PP's are trying to make. I do not think that any of us can say definitively whether he is innocent or guilty based on what the police have released so far. What people are trying to say is that his flight is not evidence of guilt to them. In other words, folks are rebutting the whole "innocent people don't flee" premise. What we are saying is that, under certain circumstances, innocent people do flee and we need more facts to say he is absolutely without a doubt guilty.
More than anything, I want peace and closure for HER family.
No I understand it exactly but not the vehemence with which it is constantly repeated as if he should be the object of sympathy. And I'll add, the stranger last seen with the missing girl is almost always her killer, so while there is some chance that he may not have done it, it is not as if police are acting irrationally here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The evidence they have against him is circumstantial. There is no camera footage of her getting in the car with him. It doesn't take a lot to meet the probable cause evidence test to be able to charge someone. They charged him with that so that they would be able to arrest him and then have him held without bond. The reckless driving charges would not have been enough to keep him held with no bond.
I hope all the people who are assuming he is guilty have to come face to face with the justice system one day and then suddenly remember that in this country we are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and not the other way around.
True, but his ACTIONS lead many to believe that he is guilty of something. Why run if you have nothing to hide?
Anonymous wrote:The suspect in the violent rape in Fairfax, which is tied by DNA to Morgan Harrington, would now be 30 - 40 years old.
http://www.readthehook.com/67132/morgans-killer-fairfax-case-connection-offers-hope-fresh-fear
Suspect in Hannah Graham case used to drive a cab. Check out the short hair.
http://www.c-ville.com/hannah-graham-case-poi-worked-cab-driver/#.VCQbP8fD-Um