02-19-2011, 04:24 PM
(02-19-2011, 04:22 PM)concerned Wrote:(02-19-2011, 04:18 PM)concerned Wrote:Also Z would have been mentioned if was an adult(02-19-2011, 04:16 PM)ZEROSPHERES Wrote:Look I live close to them. He is a minor. 16 or 17.(02-19-2011, 04:09 PM)concerned Wrote:(02-19-2011, 03:56 PM)ZEROSPHERES Wrote: He is 16 or 17
My understanding is he is 20. Does that still protect him as a minor......I could understand if he was under 18. Please correct me on this.
If you go back to tiffanys post she stated he was a minor also
Thanks....I quote here my source for believing "Z" is not a minor..
- shitstorm - 02-17-2011 06:47 PM
(02-17-2011 01:06 PM)EastCoastKat Wrote:
(02-17-2011 12:59 PM)Sean69 Wrote: Here's the thing - this is an excellent theory, but if it is true, arrests would have happened by now, and I'm talking about DNA verification as well. WTF?
Because they were there the night before so their DNA could have been there, they are admitting they were there the night before, hanging out.
So their DNA would be there from the night before, and I am sure cops are tying to separate all of it...
And by the way Mr.Z is only a few months short of being an over 21yr. old adult!
Then he is NOT a minor!