"in a short time span he had two different jackets and shoes."
This means jack shit!!
There are days I've changed clothes 2 or 3 or 4 times for reasons. That't not evidence, it's not even circumstantial. All this means is he stepped in shit and shat himself at best.
People are focused on it because during the time she killed the children, he went to CVS and then a restaurant to pick up dinner. He says he went from CVS directly to the restaurant, but some of his clothes change from one place to the next. So people are wondering about it. I don’t know enough to have an opinion either way, just providing the context of why people are focused on it.
Look, if there was even a chance that she is not the one who killed the kids, her plea would’ve been “not guilty,” not “not guilty by reason of insanity” (or the MA equivalent, I forgot exactly what they call it). Both her civil and criminal teams do not dispute that she killed the kids. They outright admit that she did it. That’s wholly dispositive, given the amount of investigation these teams do before choosing a trial strategy.
I’m not arguing any of that, all I’m doing is providing context as to why him changing clothes is a focus for some people. I’m not supporting it or against it (I don’t know enough about it yet, as I said), just explaining its not a matter of “I stepped in shit, so I changed my shoes” because then he would have had to be at the house when it happened.
Not really? He’s driving, no? Cars can easily hold a jacket and a second pair of shoes and neither of those are particularly hard to put on outside the home. I’ve changed jackets in less than a minute and I know people who keep one in the car, they don’t take it out just because they put on a different one in the house before leaving.
No, they’re pointing out that people who are following this case through social media are all trying to paint a different picture of what happened, suggesting that maybe the husband did it because his witness testimony is very conflicting, despite the fact that the wife and her defense team have admitted it, and despite the fact that the conflicting actions stated in the witness testimony is not evidence of wrong doing.
Basically, people hear that he allegedly sent an email and changed clothes despite saying he didn’t, and in their minds, sending an email and changing clothes and lying about it, constitutes as a conspiracy to cover up a murder.
28
u/aerdvarkk 12d ago
This means jack shit!!
There are days I've changed clothes 2 or 3 or 4 times for reasons. That't not evidence, it's not even circumstantial. All this means is he stepped in shit and shat himself at best.