Another question for Loach or any other LEO’s here:
What is the legal status of yellow tape surrounding the scene, saying “Crime scene - Do Not Cross” or “Police Line - Do Not Cross”. I see those from time to time, surrounding a property or crime scene, even with no visible guard at the scene. (None of the articles regarding the current case mention if there was such a tape.) If there is such a tape, but no guard on duty, how secure is that considered? Does the tape create a presumption that the scene is secure and untampered? Even if only a “legal fiction” to that effect?
Isn’t there a legal problem with the landlord granting access to the property? The murderers’ possessions don’t belong to him just because they committed a crime. They belong to the estate. I understand that it might not be released until the criminal activity was settled, which might be years in this case, but surely the landlord has intermeddled by allowing access?
That seems plausible to me. Farouk starts heading down the path from uninvolved nobody to militant; he makes some contacts with terrorists overseas; he eventually goes to Saudi Arabia, where he is paired up with a woman who is already a committed terrorist; she poses as his fiancé to get a visa; she goes back with him to finalize and carry out the plan. I have no idea, of course, if that’s really what happened. But it certainly seems possible.
It’s also a much simpler plan than trying to get terrorists here by slipping them in with Syrian refugees. But I suppose this will only add fuel to the anti-refugee sentiment. This only proves that we need to keep all Muslims out!
My guess as to why the investigation at the property ended so soon is that since there is no one to prosecute the police/FBI didn’t need as much evidence as they would if they were trying to find someone.
Well I imagine it was an arranged marriage like a lot of marriages in that part of the world. I don’t know if it was intended to be a suicide-murder pact from the get go but I figure it’ll be of little comfort either way.
IMO the apartment is going to be scraped clean down to bare wood, looking for any and all clues to anyone else in the cell.
I cant imagine any scenario where its returned to the landlord for quite some time. (property owner is a 73 yr old female, according to LA Times)
I doubt that it was a sham if they had a child, but it doesn’t matter, the baby will never know his or her parents. It depends upon who raises the kid upon whether the parents were glorious martyrs, evil villains, or unknown, “you were left on our doorstep”.
color me surprised. I saw the clip where the landlord just let everybody in to look around. All kinds of papers left on the desk. I would have dusted every square inch for prints. Too late now.
Perhaps the authorities carted everything away, the landlord salted the joint with stuff abandoned by other tenants, and charged reports $500 for tickets.
According to this story, Farook’s sister and brother-in-law are taking steps to adopt the baby. His brother-in-law seems to have his priorities correct:
