She was killed at the place where she was found, according to police, not murdered elsewhere, for instance a friend's home, and dumped later.
The police must conclude this in order for the crime scenario to fit Jim. Here is what 20/20 says the police claim are the possible last moments in Suzanne Jovin's life:
9:45 - A neighbor hears arguing
9:50 - A neighbor hears someone scream five times
"Minutes before she was found" (i.e. just prior to 9:55) - A "passerby" hears someone say "I can't believe you're doing this."
I've heard from a reliable source that the arguing was heard an entire block south of the crime scene. I have no info about where the other two events were heard, but I'll just assume, for sake of argument, somewhere in earshot of the crime scene.
The first question is whether these events can be reasonably connected to the murder. Well, first of all, we have to consider it was a warm night and many people were out, so it's entirely possible someone were yelling or screaming at their dog for all we know. Second, if we, again for sake of argument, assume all the events are relevant, then we have a problem making everything fit.
For example, for someone from within their house to hear two people arguing, most likely those two people would have to be outside, as opposed to in a car. So, if these two people were Suzanne and her eventual killer, where is the killer's car that must have driven her there? We'd have to assume it's at that street corner (East Rock and Whitney). So, in order to place Suzanne at the crime scene, she'd have had to have walked north (up East Rock toward Edge Hill) with the killer right behind-- a strange route considering Whitney is a large, well-lit, main road that directly leads to downtown New Haven.
Next we have the five screams followed by words "I can't believe you're doing this." One would think the two events would be in reverse order-- and heard by the same person. We know Suzanne had no defensive wounds. So are we to believe she's able to scream five times, express her dismay, yet not get a hand up to deflect a blow or two? It doesn't make any sense.
The problem is that if the police do not give credence to these events, it blows apart their "Suzanne must have known her killer" theory. In other words, if we can place Suzanne alive at the crime scene then it's obviously highly unlikely Suzanne fled the car of someone who had abducted her (i.e. she didn't know) as she'd have likely been screaming for help while trying to flee. Furthermore, if Suzanne is not stabbed outside a car then the fact the police found no blood in Jim's car makes it painfully obvious the police have botched the investigation by focusing on the wrong person.
I guess the short answer why the police are saying these things is "convenience".
- Jeff |
