3 ms·
It's probably meant as a lead, not as evidence. Given that this is a kidnapping, likely murder case, there's probably tons of evidence if you're looking at the
by vintermann 4y ago
It's probably meant as a lead, not as evidence. Given that this is a kidnapping, likely murder case, there's probably tons of evidence if you're looking at the right guy.
And I'm wondering about that, because we know the criminal must have been a pretty hard-core cryptocurrency nut. There aren't THAT many of them in Norway (they've already concluded they are a fluent Norwegian speaker).
- alophawen 4y ago> because we know the criminal must have been a pretty hard-core cryptocurrency nut Do we? I was still under the impression everybody was blaming her husband for the disappearance.
- vintermann 4y agoI'm thinking of the actual kidnapper/killer. The husband has an alibi for the time of the disappearance. The suspicion against him was that he commissioned the disappearance of his wife, not that he did it himself.
- dagw 4y agothey've already concluded they are a fluent Norwegian speaker The person who wrote the ransom they believe to be fluent in Norwegian, there could easily be other people involved who're foreign.
- rmbyrro 4y agoMy main concern is that this seems to be a precise lead. It might be unconsciously considered close to a real fingerprint. Instead of facing it just as a lead, it might influence investigators to, consciously or not, build confidence in framing a (wrong) person and and end up building a compelling case against them.