| So...
Bolt was there. Bolt disapeared (sic) between being photographed (supposedly) and evidence collected.
So either:
A] police disposed of bolt so it could not be taken into evidence. This would render the gun as not being allowed into evidence. They would do this either because the gun was not used and didn't want conflicting stories or gun was used and they didn't want it to be used as evidence to convict him.
B] Chris or someone close to him disposed of bolt. This would be done for the same reason of keeping it out of evidence.
Which one seems more logical? Who gained by it being missing? Why get rid of the bolt and not the gun? (Because he knew they found and saw the gun but did not know they found the bolt) I garuntee you they did not tell him about finding the bolt. You cannot trace a .270 bullet if it has impacted anything. You can, though, trace markings on the caseing and firing pin.
With the confession they did not need to introduce the gun into evidence. He said what he used, they found a gun that fit that in his possesion BEFORE the confession, so gun not needed.
What other shell casings where in the box? I would assume he shot many times, and had many good scores or good shots. So he kept only one shell casing as a momento of his acheivement? Big stretch.
When did they find the shoes in the trash? Mine dry pretty quick. I aloso walk around in my yard while watering the grass, but you wouldn't know it. You might see prints immediately, but they do not last like they do in snow or mud. Again, did he say he put them in the trash? Then why try to prove, if you are the police, that he didn't? They are not going to try and disprove what he confessed to unless it doesn't fit.
__________________
I refuse to answer that question.....because I do not know the answer. |