[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
Date: 4/29/02
Time: 7:36:06 PM
Rovaan,
Thank you for the correction. Don't know how I could have forgotten that. Actually, he said that he stood there for two minutes. That's where the 10:47 time comes from based on his estimate that he reached that point at 10:45. Anyhow, the longer Heidstra's attention was drawn to the corner the stronger my case gets.
The first time you wrote about the bushes planted between the two garages a few weeks ago, I checked the pictures I had of the area and didn't see anything that would get in the way of Schwab seeing a full-sized vehicle of any description in Nicole's driveway. I think you're referring to the hedgerow between the two doors of Nicole's garage. These are the bushes that would have partially blocked Karpf's view of a vehicle in Nicole's driveway where her Jeep was photographed early the next morning as he drove up the alley.
Between the hedgerow and Karpf's garage there were no visual obstructions whatsoever. That condition would have made it nearly impossible for Karpf to miss seeing a large, high vehicle (the Bronco, the Scout or the Jeep) parked right next to where he pulled in behind his garage. Whatever he had to do to get there didn't matter. I've put two pictures up in High Points/Crime Scenes that may be helpful. Unfortunately I can't find one of sufficient quality to show the area between Nicole's driveway and Karpf's.
Nicole had a very short driveway. The rear end of any full-sized vehicle would have been hard not to see as Karpf neared the hedgerow and passed it because of the low speed he had to have been driving to turn in the alley and stop in front his garage. Taillights are designed to reflect even the slightest bit of light shined on them from the rear or rear quarter. And a light colored vehicle shows up amazingly well in dim light. So even if Karpf had had his headlights turned off, a vehicle like the one Heidstra described would have stood out like the full moon.
If the man that Karpf saw with the dog was there at 10:38 as a lookout, Karpf wouldn't have seen him walking north because the killing would have to have been in progress to the south two minutes before Heidstra heard the two men arguing. And it was Heidstra, not Cochran who introduced the idea that what he heard sounded like an argument.
Nicoles last words to her mother (10:28) verified by Juditha's phone bill and the passing of Mandel and Aaronson in front of Nicole's walkway at 10:30 (No dog, no barking) puts the start of the killing after 10:33. That's the least amount of time the couple could have gotten out of earshot of the barking). Ron's first wound to the throat bled for at least five minutes before the final wound in his side and the killer made at least two trips to the back of the condo before he left. What is the minimum amount of time that could have taken? To top it all off, Karpf heard no sign of a violent struggle and no barking, much less frantic, continuous barking until he got to his mailbox and stood eyeball to eyeball with the dog.
Karpf was not there at 10:38, 10:39 or 10:40. But the lookout had to be unless he was on his way south to 875 South Bundy to see what was taking his partner so long. --Jasper