Originally Posted by
Atrea
Where is the evidence to support that they broke into the house?
Look at the shooter's own statements.
He claims that the first 'intruder' came down into the basement, and was shot - tumbled down the stairs, and died. He then claims he dragged the body into a room, and left it there - then went back to sitting in his chair.
He then claims that he heard a second 'intruder' a few minutes later, who also came down into the basement - was also shot, and tumbled down the stairs - but that this person didn't die, and in fact, when he tried to shoot them a second time, they laughed when his gun jammed. So he shot them with his sidearm a few times. He then dragged the body into a room, and saw that she was still alive - so he put a gun to her chin and blew her brains out.
He then went about his normal routine.
This all happened around noon.
The following day, his neighbour - who reported not hearing any gunshots - said that he came over, and was acting suspiciously - asking about a lawyer.
His neighbour then contacted the police, who came and found the bodies.
Now, there's no 'conspiracy' here. There's a severe lack of sense with this man's story.
For one, what kind of home intruders would try to break in during the middle of the day? You might say "Anyone who breaks into anyone's house is an idiot", and there's some truth to that - but does it make sense?
Secondly, why did the shooter not report the break-in immediately? Why did he leave the dead bodies of two teenagers in his basement, while he went about his normal routine? A full day passed before the neighbour finally saw something was up, and contacted the authorities.
It seems rather convenient that both of these individuals were shot coming down a flight of stairs - so that they tumbled down the stairs. Especially the second individual who - again, stupid or not - came down into an area that was presumably occupied by an armed man. Falling down the stairs would readily explain any signs of a struggle or defensive wounds, and the time that had passed since the shooting would prevent an accurate estimated time of death from being determined.
There is also the fact that the shooter claimed that his house had been robbed 'eight times', while the Sheriff's records only indicate a single instance of this occurring - and that time only fairly recently. It seems unlikely that he'd report only the most recent break-in, but none of the others.
Moreover, the length of time that passed after the event leading up until his arrest creates a very large window for the shooter to create the appearance of a robbery. So while there may be signs of forced entry, there is no evidence to suggest that the 'intruders' did it. And in fact, forensic investigation may reveal that they did not.
My questions are valid; why are we taking this individual's assertion, that these were home invaders - home invaders that he brutally executed, and then hid for well over a day - as gospel truth?