controversial theory

Posted by on December 5, 2005 in general thoughts | 0 comments

Something about the “murder” of Peter Falconio, doesn’t quite add up to me.

“Oh, here he goes again…” yeah, yeah..

1. There seems to be no evidence, apart from Joanne Lees account of events.
2. We know she lied about having an affair while they were both in Sydney.
3. Her body language in interviews always displays clear intention to deceive signals, watch her body language when she’s asked questions. Sometimes shes cool as a cucumber, other times she has a really odd nervous cough
4. Peter Falconio has been spotted twice, by fairly reliable eye witnesses, after he was supposedly killed.

I reckon, either she was involved in killing him or he dis-appeared after they had an argument and for reasons known only to her, she’s not saying.

Its odd because, you only see bits of it and obviously there might be things I’ve not seen (I’m hardly studying the case) there is this one thing that I do have, my instincts tell me she is dishonest about the events – watch her see what you think.

Instincts are a weird old animal. I used to always try and think conciously about things to make decisions, now I listen more to my instincts because I understand more about them. Its your sub-concious telling you something, interpreting it can be hard as you have to think if its logical or some weird stereotype assumption you’re making.

Now I’m using both bits together, I think I feel like I’m getting wiser in my old age!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *