|
Post by happyhaddock on Oct 2, 2006 1:25:15 GMT -5
How did he sabotage him? By showing up outside the place? Scott should have taken it anyway. After all, it can't be used in the court of law and MPD already had him pegged for the crime, as you assert. What did he have to lose? Especially if he was innocent. If he takes the test and fails the cops say it proves he is guilty. If he takes it and passes the cops say the result wasn't conclusive. Lose lose. He wanted to take it to get Frey to take it so he could see if she was involved. Instead he finds out she is a police agent and has been lying to him all along. What was Brocchini doing there? Exactly?
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Oct 2, 2006 1:27:12 GMT -5
It was John's wife, Reve, who had been having an affair that ended shortly before their son, Adam, disappeared. She told LE about it right away. Both John and Reve were cleared of suspicion in their son's disappearance by "extensive lie detector tests" and telling everything they knew. IIRC John had an affair some time after the murder. I'm not aware that Reve ever had an affair. What 'cleared' Reve and John was that no matter how they tried the cops couldn't pin it on them. The lie detector never figured into it.
|
|
|
Post by texasgirl on Oct 3, 2006 14:07:46 GMT -5
I don't put a whole lot of stock into the lie detector test. Some who are guilty have passed it, and others who are innocent look guilty as heck. But asking a person who has just lost a loved one to take a polygraph, while they are already racked with grief, is insensitive. The law does not require it, yet most LE and news media base their judgement of guilt or innocence on whether a person takes it and passes or fails. Baloney!
|
|