Quote:
Originally Posted by Catfish
^ certainly true
But it does not explain:
1. the claim that he put her off the ship before, at this island. Or did only the media say that? Not sure here.
2. if it was an accident, why didn't he instantly(!) call for SAR or headed to the nearest port, with the body. You do not just "bury someone at sea", this is an idiotic statement or "justification", especially with a mile from the coast
3. the dismembering
4. the "accidentally" sinking Nautilus
All looks too much like a cover-up.
Well, all this has been said before.
I am sure there was some ugly assault circumstance happening before this "accident", but it will be probably impossible to prove that, which again makes this dismembering more suspicious.
Very sad.
|
To get somewhat closer to answering some of above you need to understand how Peter may have been thinking...here is my best shot
1) I think his very first conversation with the authorities would have been that he put her to shore. But its a fact that during the first hearing (the day after) he did state she died in the sub by accident.
2,3,4) His testimony is that he was in shock that something he had built had taken a life - he considered suicide by sinking the sub with both of them in it.
The same state of mind caused him to dump the body and sink the sub. He still maintains that he didnt dismember the body (this is where I cant follow anymore)
The fact of the matter is that only Peter knows what happened, but what part of what he is saying can be believed...In my book it contains both believable, plausible and unbelievable parts
A very tragic story...