ST Murder Investigation Thread

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by cpayne5

No, I don't think it's at all safe to say that at this point. We may think it points to only one motive, but to make an assumption with two facts is not wise. It may turn out to be the truth in the end, but it is not wise to paint yourself into that corner at this time.

I hear you. However, I'm not suggesting any motive. I'm only suggesting that the motive can't be robbery -- nothing was taken.

If you break into a house, and risk so much, you take something to make the risk worthwhile. Nobody was in the house 8 days earlier when the first break in occurred. I don't buy the argument that somebody broke in, there was nobody home, and they decided not to take anything (or there wasn't anything to take).

I'm not analyzing the 2nd break in as much as the 1st. Why would someone break in with the intention of robbery, and not take anything? Nobody was home. To me that is so highly unlikely that it's hardly worth considering. It's far more likely, given the circumstances, that the motive was not robbery than otherwise.