that they don t necessarily need to take same objection you re togs about house with at least five that night i think six people in it she might have thought i heard strange things but five other people here so if there s a problem i m sure somebody else will happened it. thes other piece that might be more individual factors for her, is how she responds to stress. does she somebody who springs into action is she somebody who just krief crumbles and freezes or somebody who just wants to avoid the situation? i don t know anything doctor you re saying that it s a lot more complicated than people may see by reading affidavit. absolutely. absolutely there are general psychological factors like the bystander effect that i mention and then there s individual factors that played into her decision making that night. where else do we potentially where investigators may find dna of the suspect at the crime scene we know the sheathe we know but it s the way the dna is
inconsistently the blood issue on the sheathe is porkt and michael will tell you there was a violent struggle and how is it i m just saying how is it there s no blood spatter at all on this sheathe from the knife on the bed right next to one of the bodies. that s one of the things they re going look at as well and argue. yeah they re going to bring exparents privating investigators they ve already been on the crime scene, greg and this is hard for me because i feel for this one twhans is on the scene. but they re going rip her apart ons defense stand if she takes the stand what do you see happening? that would be incriminating. point out the dna so defense attorneys will do what they do in dna cases they attack the integrity of the dna itself the collection methods, the
maddie kaylee and ethan continues we re joined tonight by esteem panel of experts to examine every aspect of this case. paul morrow inspector doctor marco fox news contributor doctor lauren miller neuropsychologist they join me on set today. thank you y all so much for being here. paul i want to go to you first. from an investigation stand point when you see this affidavit we ve been going through for days now what immediately sticks out to you? one of the things is this guy was clearly not the criminal master mind that he thought he was. he managed to leave a sheathe with his dna at scene and left a significant digital foot precinct which we ve been talking about how significant that was going to be. he drove his own car to the scene. and let s see what else emerges on reporting that we re hearing is things that led to him
somebody sells going to call and that they don t necessarily need to take same objection you re togs about house with at least five that night i think six people in it she might have thought i heard strange things but five other people here so if there s a problem i m sure somebody else will happened it. thes other piece that might be more individual factors for her, is how she responds to stress. does she somebody who springs into action is she somebody who just krief crumbles and freezes or somebody who just wants to avoid the situation? i don t know anything doctor you re saying that it s a lot more complicated than people may see by reading affidavit. absolutely. absolutely there are general psychological factors like the bystander effect that i mention and then there s individual factors that played into her decision making that night. where else do we potentially where investigators may find dna of the suspect at the crime scene we know the sheathe we know
in your theory after reading affidavit that he was targeting someone? absolutely. the fact of him driving back and forth from the house 12 times pee clearly had an identified target in mind. yeah. paul now, we know this guy he thinks he s very smart. he s pursuing his criminal justice degree ph.d. already has his master there and has a little bit of technology knowledge and wasn t as careful as he should have been were you surprised that he left the sheathe there and circled back to crime scene is that a red flag for you? certainly seems to be. you can theorize why he did it whatever drove him to do this could play into why he return and could be a more reason which is that he we know he took rout after he left the scene. possibly to with do what he thought he was doing which was