Good questions and thanks for asking them.<quoted text> Why do you think the cameras were cleared up? The camers aren't cleared up for me, but we don't have to agree. No, LE hasn't stated a gun was used, that's a thought. Your thought is Holly was found during the last search, but that hasn't been confirmed either. Why would a gun charges be made against ZA? No one said a gun was found, during the last search.
Am I misunderstanding your post?
I consider the camera issue resolved due to a couple of things:
1. LE has not stated anything about cameras being present. Does not mean they were not there of course, but it is reasonable to think, if significant, they would have been mentioned early on.
2. LE has not mentioned any evidence coming from cameras. Again, does not mean they were not there but it is reasonable that they and the evidence would be mentioned and used to make an arrest earlier.
As you stated, these are just my opinions. I could be wrong on both theories but I believe they are reasonable.
My thoughts on the gun.
1. As you stated, LE has not mentioned that a gun was used. That is not surprising if such evidence is surpressed until the trial. Guns are common in violent crimes. So in this case, a lack of acknowledgement by LE does not neccesarily discount the possibility that a gun was used.
2. If a gun was used and a bullet was fired, the bullet would have to be in the possesion of LE as well as the gun before a forensic match could be made between the two items. If a match was made, two things must be concluded, the gun and bullet were used in the crime and possession, by the accused, of the gun during the crime has to be proven. When did the possesion of the gun and the bullet occur by LE? It is reasonable to assume that the possesion of the bullet was made when the human remains were found in order to link the bullet to the crime. You are correct that I assume that the human remains were not made until the search of the property just prior to the arrest. I cannot say that I know how long it takes for ballistic match to be made but, again I am assuming, it would take more than a few days.
3. I am assuming that human remains were not found until the extensive search just prior to the arrest. My reasoning is that human remains would need to be found before a capital punishment crime would be sought. Further, it seems resonable that the arrest would closely follow obtaining key evidence such as human remains.
Again, all my opinions that could be incorrect.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts and reasoning as well.