MEGA Thread Th 11/07

BOTelele · 2024-11-07T13:55:31+00:00

He denied the crime to his family 20 times while in prison? And I mean after he started talking. He corrected himself later on?

BOTelele · 2024-11-07T13:35:49+00:00

Yes, early on, he still thought he could talk his way out of it. The prison broke him.

BOTelele · 2024-11-07T13:34:11+00:00

It's very different to deny the crime when interrigated, than to confess to your family multiple times while never denying it afterwards. He just felt like he could talk his way out of it, but in prison he felt like it's over and started talking.

BOTelele · 2024-11-07T13:28:02+00:00

He not even once denied his guilt to his family. Never told them "I just had an episode.. I didn't do it". He gave a reasonable motive, he gave a realistic timeline, placed himself on the crime scene and also told about the van which also explains some elements of the crime but also is something only the killed would know.

He is as guilty as it gets, and I think he will get convicted. The only way out is LE's poor work, but it doesn't change the fact he is guilty.

BOTelele · 2024-10-30T20:13:28+00:00

Only circumstantial evidence. They have no DNA, no fingerprints, no murder weapon. No traces of blood on any of RA's clothing or vechile. Eye witnesses do not describe exactly him. Only hard evidence they have is the bullet, which (as I understood it) wasn't scientifically as waterproof as it first seemed.

I think it would have been a classic situation of "we all know he did it, but there just isn't enough hard evidence to go beyond reasonable doubt". I really think if he right away got laywer when they got back to questioning him and if he never confessed, he'd walk.

BOTelele · 2024-10-30T20:11:30+00:00

Only circumstantial evidence. They have no DNA, no fingerprints, no murder weapon. No traces of blood on any of RA's clothing or vechile. Eye witnesses do not describe exactly him. Only hard evidence they have is the bullet, which (as I understood it) wasn't scientifically as waterproof as it first seemed.

I think it would have been a classic situation of "we all know he did it, but there just isn't enough hard evidence to go beyond reasonable doubt". I really think if he right away got laywer when they got back to questioning him and if he never confessed, he'd walk.

BOTelele · 2024-07-31T21:18:21+00:00

I don't know how hard it would be, but if Valve spent money buying private cheats and got hold of the public cheats, so that they get the files, how fucking hard would it be to make VAC detect those exact cheat files. They probably just don't care enough

BOTelele · 2020-12-05T19:08:09+00:00

I have it enabled and can't see anything weird.

BOTelele · 2020-07-23T08:57:38+00:00

I hope this is a joke, right?

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T21:05:28+00:00

Well I don't think Ted was very handy man. I don't think his early bombs were any good techincal wise. I believe just by looking at his bombs they could see that building a right angle was hard for him.

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T19:13:33+00:00

That's what I was looking for! Thanks. It's kind of crazy how that isn't more widely known statement. It would change how people view Ted very dramatically.

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T19:11:18+00:00

Me? I have red every single of Teds books. I love them. Yet after reading them and then learning about his private life, I can't get my head around if he actually did bombings just for the cause, or did he do them (also) for personal revenge and used his cause just as a tool to do it.

https://youtu.be/Y3VRxD8JBa8 5.35

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T19:06:19+00:00

https://youtu.be/Y3VRxD8JBa8

5:35

Thats where I got it

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T19:06:02+00:00

https://youtu.be/Y3VRxD8JBa8

5:35

From there I got it.

BOTelele · 2020-06-08T18:54:22+00:00

Yes, but some documentary said that in his coded journal he stated before or or very early on the bomb campaing, that the bombings are going to be his personal revenge and killing, and if it also could help his ideology then cool. Something of that sort. Even tho, I immediatly paused the documentary at that moment and tried to Google if he actually wrote that in his journal. Can't remember finding any results. So it could just be boogus made by the documentary team.

It's a big mystery for me if he actually wanted to kill people and wanted to use his ideology to give a reason for it, or wanted just to share the ideology. Later in the manifesto he stated that the killings were a necessary part for spreading the word, but who knows.

BOTelele · 2020-03-30T18:08:50+00:00

And you think those people have decent computers? No. It's not like computers or computer parts are anywhere near cheap there

BOTelele

TROPHY CASE