No, detectives would not laugh.
It is not the lack of emotion per-se. As I tried to make clear the person's demeanor is analyzed by any detective who interrogates. That's why 911 calls play a big part in cases. A person's emotional reaction is a clue.
I interpret the transcript as possibly lacking the normal emotion associated with rape. I think it's apparent the detective and the Attorney General felt the same way as a confession is usually a slam dunk case.
Look at the facts. The guy is running for the Senate. Winning ANY case is a plus for him and he has a confession! It's a cake walk IF the confession is real but he knows it just doesn't sound right.
On that note I'm going to bed. I'm not a religious man but I do intend to say a quick "Thank God" it's not with someone like Darla! :eek3:
What an illiterate ignoramus. You have just announced, with this post, that you either did not read the article or any of the posts on this thread except the one which triggered your role-playing sexual stupor, or, you read them and you have the reading comprehension of a dim-witted first grader.
You have made up all of your "facts".
"It's a cake walk IF the confession is real but he knows it just doesn't sound right".
That's pulled straight out of your ass.
In fact, The Colorado Independent explained, in an article I linked to, that: "In establishing whether there were grounds to arrest the suspect, Greeley police had the victim phone the suspect from the police station. That call was recorded and entered into evidence. The recording was made without his knowledge, so it can't be used in court."
The tape was not admissable. That's what's known as a technicality. Surely someone as educated by what occurs on television procedurals as you are, would know that evidence that is deemed not admissable on a legal technicality is not something "that just doesn't sound right".
You fucking idiot.
You dare to come on this thread and post things you invented in your zeal to jerk off on a message board and apologize for a rapist.
Further, your invented belief that the police didn't believe her, is contradicted by this:
"The report, however, suggests that the police did recommend charges. “I advised (the suspect) that I would be requesting a felony summons for sexual assault,” Detective Michael Zeller wrote in the report. "
Once Buck's refusal to prosecute became a political issue, the police of chief denied that this was true, though on what grounds since the newspaper has the actual written report, I would be hard pressed to state. It's obvious that this has become a political hot potato.
But that's what the detective wrote in the report. Which you would have known if you had bothered to read anything on this thread before you began masturbating like the deranged monkey you are.
Try and get your facts straight idiot. This is not about what you think, what it sounds like to you, or most absurdly, what it "smells like" to you.
Read before commenting you incredible moron.