07-05-2013, 02:44 PM
"I concur about innocent until proven guilty. As mentioned before we are not crucifying the kid, it could all be an elaborate plot to kill them both. If that is the case none of this makes sense at all. There would be NO reason or motive to kill them both. I just don't get it!"
Actually, you have it backwards. There was no reason for the boy to kill your daughter.
There was ample reason for others to kill the 2 of them: they were trying to make inroads into some other people's business territory, they were not local, they were trying to buy land that someone else wanted to buy, they might have had $10,000 on them, they might have offended someone, and they might have struggled and seen the identity of the robbers. In some cases robbers will wear masks, but if the victim does not cooperate and tears off the masks, the robbers will kill them. Any 1 of those reasons is enough to kill them, add them all together and you have so much motive it is not funny. Can you provide even 1 motive why your son in law might have killed your daughter?
You need to stop thinking like a civilized person and think like a savage instead.
Actually, you have it backwards. There was no reason for the boy to kill your daughter.
There was ample reason for others to kill the 2 of them: they were trying to make inroads into some other people's business territory, they were not local, they were trying to buy land that someone else wanted to buy, they might have had $10,000 on them, they might have offended someone, and they might have struggled and seen the identity of the robbers. In some cases robbers will wear masks, but if the victim does not cooperate and tears off the masks, the robbers will kill them. Any 1 of those reasons is enough to kill them, add them all together and you have so much motive it is not funny. Can you provide even 1 motive why your son in law might have killed your daughter?
You need to stop thinking like a civilized person and think like a savage instead.