05-30-2012, 09:04 AM
(05-30-2012, 07:46 AM)Lady Cop Wrote: i still think a stranger would have grabbed her off the street and let the bike fall where it was. there was no reason to take the bike.
and this is new to me overnight, that the hand-grips of bike were off (removed). someone was worried about prints, as they would have retained prints.
This is the crux of the crime IMO. If I was an opportunistic perp, saw Mickey riding at 2 am, and hit her bike with my [car, pick-up], there is NO reason to take the bike. Taking the bike is a liability in several ways.
I have to subdue Mickey and get her in my vehicle. (Even if she hit her head and was knocked unconscious, I still have to move her body into my vehicle.)
Then I have to pick-up the bike and put it in my trunk or the back of my pick-up.
I then have the bike in my vehicle as I am driving 27 miles to dump it in the Whiskey Bay area.
Once there, I have to get the bike out of the trunk/pick-up bed and dispose of it.
The time to remove and dump the bike doesn't make sense if the perp is a stranger to Mickey. The bike would tie him to the crime for an inordinate amount of time. Why would a random perp drive 54 miles round trip to dump a bike that could have his fingerprints and tie him to Mickey if he is stopped by LE?
The only reason to dump the bike IMO is if the perp who grabbed Mickey left it lay there and someone else stole the bike off the street. The bike thief then finds out that the bike is connected to a crime and dumps it far away so s/he isn't connected to the abduction. However, 27 miles is a long way to go to dump a bike you stole.