But of course you are siting possibilities that may not be true. JM's first statement to police was that Jeremt phoned at 3.30am. Another assumption you make is that in order for Jeremy to get home he must have used the bike. To call someone esle absurd just because their view is different to your own is a little absurd in itself would you not agree?
JM wrote around 3:30AM and lied in that statement in an effort to aid Jeremy. She didn't know the exact time which is why she asked her roomates. Her roomates are the ones who were more certain about the time insisting it was around 3. Two say it was 3 another who is not as certain as them thought 3:15.
As for the bike, I don't assume he had to use it. In fact, at numerous times I stated I would not have bothere dbecause at that hour few people are on the road and are unlikely to be on the street to see you let alone to wake up and look out a window to see what car parked. His neighbors didn't state they heard or saw him leave to go to WHF. Since they didn't know he left why would they have to have heard him arrive back hom by car?
He probably did use a bike though because there is no reason for him to have stolen his mother's bike (that she bought recently) and to take it by car to his house to use. Why would she have bought it for herself and then immediately let him take it. The mud on the side of the tires suggestes it had been used at WHF recently moreover. His claims of having had it for weeks which means right afte rhis mother bought it make no sense.
So while he had no need to use a bike instead of a car he likely did so because HE was under the impression using a car would be more apt to someone seeing or hearing him come and go. I would have used a car simply and the fact his neighbors didn't hear him leave vindicates my own choice of how I would have traveled.
