Savannah
The Fly
In addition to the heinous murdering spree through MD, VA and DC, and the liquor store murder in AL, they have now been tied to a killing in Tacoma, WA and one in Baton Rouge, LA.
I have no doubt they committed all the crimes in the famous spree, or even the AL killing. But I am starting to wonder about these others. Of course they are perfectly capable and they were in those cities at the time, but this is what bothers me:
The man in Tacoma whose gun was tied to the shooting of the girl there claims he 'loaned' it to Muhammad and Malvo and they gave it back.
Sounds fishy to me. They don't seem like the kind of guys you'd loan a gun to or the kind who would return it. Could it be this guy, who turned over the gun and it matches the crime ballistically, be covering for himself? Could it be he did it and now sees a way to throw the blame off on the snipers since everyone knows they are already mass murderers? Thoughts on this?
The killing in Baton Rouge. Muhammad's ex-wife's sister's husband stated on CNN he was a police detective in that town and he knew how Moose felt because he was frustrated with his serial killer case. Could it be they see this as a way to 'solve' the crime by pinning it on the sniper too?
I could be barking up the wrong tree here but it reminds me of Bonnie and Clyde. Remember the movie (it was a true story) and how she wrote that poem about 'blame it on Bonnie and Clyde?' She said even though they had murdered and robbed a lot of people they were not guilty of every crime blamed on them and she thought it was a cop's easy way out to say they did it and cover it up and make it go away. Since they were so awful on their rampage, they were capable and no one doubted it, but could it be that they, and the snipers are not responsible for everything pinned on their tails?
I have no doubt they committed all the crimes in the famous spree, or even the AL killing. But I am starting to wonder about these others. Of course they are perfectly capable and they were in those cities at the time, but this is what bothers me:
The man in Tacoma whose gun was tied to the shooting of the girl there claims he 'loaned' it to Muhammad and Malvo and they gave it back.
Sounds fishy to me. They don't seem like the kind of guys you'd loan a gun to or the kind who would return it. Could it be this guy, who turned over the gun and it matches the crime ballistically, be covering for himself? Could it be he did it and now sees a way to throw the blame off on the snipers since everyone knows they are already mass murderers? Thoughts on this? The killing in Baton Rouge. Muhammad's ex-wife's sister's husband stated on CNN he was a police detective in that town and he knew how Moose felt because he was frustrated with his serial killer case. Could it be they see this as a way to 'solve' the crime by pinning it on the sniper too?
I could be barking up the wrong tree here but it reminds me of Bonnie and Clyde. Remember the movie (it was a true story) and how she wrote that poem about 'blame it on Bonnie and Clyde?' She said even though they had murdered and robbed a lot of people they were not guilty of every crime blamed on them and she thought it was a cop's easy way out to say they did it and cover it up and make it go away. Since they were so awful on their rampage, they were capable and no one doubted it, but could it be that they, and the snipers are not responsible for everything pinned on their tails?
Last edited:
