Posted on 06/23/2002 7:58:29 PM PDT by Semper911
I hope this is not another false alarm...
if he was the perp, wouldn't mk be able to identify him..
and this whole time he has been in custody...we still see the cops reaching in all directions
does anybody know....is there any forensic evidence from this?
They have not ruled Ricci out.
The red flag with him is that he was a worker in the Smart home and he has led a life of crime.
Let me summarize:
1) I've been on FR for twice as long as you. In the olden days of the Clinton scandals, we tried to deal with facts. Alamo Girl's Two Degrees of Separation - an awesome work - was based upon that premise. Sure there was specualation and debate, but we were looking for facts that would put the Scumbag behind bars. Unsubstantiated allegations were challenged.
2) While you want to hang your hat on the Susan Smith case, there is no similarity between her socio-economic-cultural status and the Smarts. The Smart family has raised bright, accomplished, loving children. Susan Smith was a loser.
3) We now have two possible suspects with extensive criminal records, with access to the house or neighborhood.
4) In spite of #3, you seem determined to smear the Smart family. It should not be surprising to you that I choose to accept the belief in their innocence as expressed by our consititution and daily by city fathers and by over 10,000 citizens that turned out yesterday in 29 counties to search for Elizabeth.
P.S. I'm not going anywhere.
I'll be ticked because Ed Smart and his brothers have been putting on a righteous front, and pretending to be good members of my Church, and eliciting our sympathy. I'll also be ticked because they will have give ammunition to Mormon bashers. I'm withholding judgment on the National Enquirer story. There haven't been any denials.
Edmunds had been reported "hanging out" in the area.
Edmunds had a criminal record, and outstanding warrants.
Edmunds is/was a "suspect", regardless of any public statements by law enforcement.
On the other side of the coin,
1. Edmunds may be/have an accomplice.
2. It is now known that Edmunds slept in his car on undeveloped lands behind the Smart home, some/all of the time.
Therefore, Edmunds may have seen, talked to, or inadvertently given information to someone that may be a/the suspect.
Edmunds may be able to "finger" that suspect.
3. Edmunds, having been on the lookout for suspicious persons that might be law enforcement out to effect an arrest on two (2) outstanding warrants, would be more than likely to be "exceedingly aware" of any other suspicious persons, including those that were NOT law enforcement.
Edmunds may therefore, be able to identify person(s) that "looked" normal, but "acted" in a manner that was suspicious to Edmunds.
Paranoia is a survival trait when people really ARE out to get You.
Unfortunately, Edmunds paranoia would also lead him to believe that he was not only a suspect, but would be pinned with the crime regardless of whether he did it or not.
Therefore, after a day or so of failure to recover the girl, Edmunds decided it was time to move on, assuming that his name would eventually come up, and the farther away, the better.
The fact that he's a habitual drug user probably doesn't help the thought processes a lot either.
However, Edmunds has given full permission to search his vehicle, and may have nothing to hide concerning the Smart kidnapping.
If that can be established, any informational contribution he can give concerning the case and it's eventual solution would be in his best interest, considering the two (2) warrants.
I've watched many of the family interviews on Fox. I'm more impressed with the women than the men. (That's not really surprising. Behind every good man there is a better woman.) They are bright and articulate. I don't believe they would tolerate any funny business.
I too would be annoyed to be wrong. There is usually at least one bad apple in every family - especially one as large as this. I think there are just too many indicators leading away from the family.
I'm happy for you. Why that's relevant, I also don't know. But whatever.
"Unsubstantiated allegations were challenged.>
As they should be. However, I did not allege anything. I reapeated a comment I heard, emphasizing that it was not confirmed in any way.
"2) While you want to hang your hat on the Susan Smith case, there is no similarity between her socio-economic-cultural status and the Smarts. The Smart family has raised bright, accomplished, loving children. Susan Smith was a loser."
Meaning, I guess, that socio-economic status determines whether or not one can commit a crime. Your own argument here is very weak in itself. Susan Smith was indeed a loser...because of what she did. Had she not been the culprit in the death of her children, I am certain that you would not be calling her a "loser" now.
"3) We now have two possible suspects with extensive criminal records, with access to the house or neighborhood."
Very true.
"4) In spite of #3, you seem determined to smear the Smart family."
I smeared no one, simply putting forth a couple of possible scenarios, any of which are just valid as any other, until the truth is learned. Regardless of your misunderstanding, I still pray for Elizabeth's safe return.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.