He could have talked as well, you never know do you, better safe than sorry. Can I have my shovel back by the way?
You're a fantasist, they always get caught. We are doing the law abiding public a service by keeping you occupied on here.
No no I think if it in the same was as people look at the universe ... I find the things I cannot explain or fully understand arouse my interest far more than those I can
I actually have sat on a murder trial btw. We found the person guilty, but it was by no means a clear cut case. So I was quite amused with your daft ideas. Today the main problem for police forces is nothing to do with DNA or whether you do this that and the other. The biggest problem facing all crime investigations is financing it. One case could wipe out an entire police budget. People have many misconceptions about dna, but one of the biggest problems with it is again cost. So it becomes a matter of what samples to send for testing and what ones not to. As for CCTV etc, it takes an enormous amount of man hours that the police force can ill afford, someone having to sit through hours of pointless footage to find a few seconds or minutes of detail. It gets to the stage you have to convict on what you know, but not necessarily based on the perfect evidence, but based on what the police force could afford.
Fair enough but like I say the aim is no investigation and minimising the evidence or anything that links you to the body if discovered. These are not just my ideas they are actually the things you can do.
You over think it too much bruv. A conviction can be based on do the Jury all agree you are guilty. They don't need a shred of evidence to come to that conclusion. As long has they can associate you in some way with the crime, your life hangs in the balance of 12 people. You ever heard of the Birmingham six?
