Police not being subtle

There is little doubt about whom the Police think killed Kirsty Bentley. Look at this wonderful story in The Press:

Kirsty was carried down a bank, rather than thrown, and the body placed in the foetal position, with her clothes arranged neatly, respectfully covering her.

TVNZ’s Sunday show interviewed former British policeman and child-murder expert Chuck Burton.

He said an interpretation of the evidence put Sid and John “in the mix” as suspects. The means of death was the result of a youthful-type assault, Burton said, while the state of the body pointed to a more mature hand at work, and possibly someone who had an emotional connection to Kirsty.

Wow, someone young and someone older – almost like a father and sob combination. And a father and son who had an emotional connection to Kirsty, Who could that be?

Williams said the state of the body suggested there was “a strong link between the offender and Kirsty”.

Also, the girth of the tree the dog was tied to at the Ashburton scene suggested the dog had to be let off its leash when it was being tied up, and it had not run away.

Hmmn, why would the dog not run away? Oh the Police are being so cryptic. You need to have an IQ of at least 75 to work it out.

And just in case, you had not worked it out, we are reminded:

Among the suspects were Kirsty’s brother, John, and father, Sid. …

John and Sid Bentley repeated their denials of any involvement with Kirsty’s death on Sunday night’s programme. Sid Bentley was again unable to recall what he did on the afternoon of Kirsty’s disappearance.

Goodness knows who killed Kirsty. Maybe it was the killer from the mystery ketch?

Or perhaps Robin Bain did it?

Or the burglar who killed the Lundys.