Yeah, I have to backtrack from my earlier statements. I'm more conflicted now; I had thought that this interview was the first one; but now I find out that there were a few sessions before, right? I'm curious to watch those tapes, or read those transcripts, to see how the interrogations progressed. Do you know…

Sure, but the chances of coincidence decrease as more and more corroborating evidence is found. If the coincidences here were limited to Brendan simply guessing the method of murder, I'd be much less suspicious of his guilt.

When does he say how deep he cut it, or if that wound would have involved the cutting of the jugular? I also don't understand how there could be no trace of her in the bedroom, but perhaps it's some version of the truth.

Wasn't he mirandized before the very start of the first tape? The investigators mention it and ask if he understands what that means.

but what if the confession leads to finding physical evidence that backs up the confession? The "Rebutting a Murderer" podcast discussed this a lot and made me question a LOT of what the original series asserted. I'm curious as to 1) when the police started looking for bullets, and 2) when they started searching for…