I disagree as it come out today that he has text her earlier that day asking her to meet him in the lab.

>>>I disagree as it come out today that he has text her earlier that day asking her to meet him in the lab.

You have a point - and not only that, but he was also a member of an Asian culture appreciation club in high school. So perhaps an obsession with Asian women?

On the other hand, I've also seen reports that he was a control freak with the way he treated his own fiancee, and had anger management issues. So lashing out impulsively in rage due to some perceived insult is also possible.

The question is what triggered the murder. It just seems strange to me that he would pick the week before her wedding to make a pass at Ms. Le, or make an email appointment to sexually assault her in the lab, while still living with his own fiancee. Not that criminals need logical reasons for what they do, but it seems to be bizarrely bad judgment on his part. I'm inclined to think the email concerned some legitimate work issue, because otherwise why would Ms. Le meet him at the lab?

If it turns out she was simply strangled, but with no signs of sexual assault, I'd vote for an impulse killing. But if she was sexually assaulted (and I don't think the police are talking about it yet), then I'd agree that there was probably a romantic / sexual motive to his actions.

We'll see. There's still a great deal yet to be revealed.

Wth Said

If it turns out she was simply strangled, but with no signs of sexual assault, I'd vote for an impulse killing. But if she was sexually assaulted (and I don't think the police are talking about it yet), then I'd agree that there was probably a romantic / sexual motive to his actions.
___
I have to agree with WTH here...I say that is very logical thinking...

...and I am leaning towards that thought that he was sexually attracted to her...followed her or met in that room with the intent of having sex with her....we don't really know if there was a past relationship with the two..that is always possible..and that may become very important...

I guess we will know soon enough...not matter what though....A beautiful intelligent woman was murdered for probably no reason at all other than she didnt give Raymond Clark what he wanted..either sex..or love, or just a better working relationship..whatever it was that he wanted..she didnt or couldnt give it to him and he killed her.

Most of the lab techs I've worked with have been very intelligent - some of them had PhD's from foreign universities, and all of them were better versed in most techniques & experimental design than most of the grad students. However, that didn't keep some grad students from behaving in absolutely deplorable ways to them.

If there was not a romantic or sexual motive, somehow that makes it even more tragic and senseless that this promising woman was murdered for absolutely NO reason, other than his whim or anger problem.

I would bet she was sexually assaulted. She was pretty and liked to show her breasts -- in almost every photo, her breasts are very much exposed.

She was beautiful, intelligent, his superior in position at the lab, he was a member of an Asian appreciation club thing, he texted her to meet him, it was close to her wedding day, she was also very comfortable in her own skin meaning confident likely in how she looked and/or was perceived, those things alone look damning to all of us and I'm glad I'm not on the jury because, I'm sorry, I've already judged him.

I think he was half in love and maybe half in awe of her and also disgusted with himself and her because of it. I think he may have had the hots for her in only the way a controlling possessive egomaniac can.

I think that perhaps it all came down so close to her wedding day because maybe he'd decided at the last minute to make a play, perhaps change her mind. Maybe he snapped with all of whatever pent up rage he had against her when she didn't fall at his feet grateful for his "appreciation" and that was his undoing, and hers. At that point it was impulsive. I don't think he'd planned to kill her but maybe to make her love him or something...

Whatever happened, she's dead, I believe in my gut that he did it and he is a very very sick individual. I hope they give him the full treatment and none of this revolving door penal system nonsense. He needs to do time for what he did and he needs to get some massive counseling while there.

Perhaps Le and Clark had a flirtatious relationship, who knows maybe they even acted on flirtation - or interacted in such a way that pissed off Clark's gf... who probabbly let all hell loose at home.. and he faulted Le for his mistakes in pining after an unattatinable young woman... or maybe Le was mean to him like he was a dick at work... who knows...

but just because someone says so and so is so nice and wonderful, doesnt mean they treated all people like that.. and that goes for Clark and Le... we will never really know the dynamic relationship of these people but it obviously wasnt a random killing!

fafa- please understand that when you are 4'11" tall, and 90lbs, you are roughly the size of an 11 year old boy. That was probably the only thing about her that gave her any curves or distinguished her from a child.

I really think I've heard enough judgement about how Ms. Le dressed. Honestly, it is different when you are small. I am also 4'11", and it is hard to be taken seriouly when you are the size of a child.

With respect to "how Ms. Le dressed", have you NOT seen the picture clipped from Yale's video camera of Ms. Le walking in the Yale building carrying papers?
Let's see, green top definitely causal, conservative attire.
I'm comparing her dress with what was common on my university campus; Ms. Le is appropriately dressed!

Now in her vacation, formal party, weekend-type pictures, well, I think she looks appropriate and beautiful.
After seeing the formal party picture (Ms.Le in white gown with crescent of flowers framing her face, her fiance in a tux) I can only imagine how beautiful their wedding would have been...

I tend to agree with the WTH comment, however, in addition, I think it is clear that Clark is a psychopath and/or sociopath. He strangles a woman to death the size of an 11 year old child, then goes back to work and shows no signs of distress. He even goes to a fair and plays softball a few days later. If he had any sense of regret, he never showed it. He was described as a "dick" earlier. I'd say this is a gross understatement. Based on the available information, this was not a sexual assault and I see no evidence of any sexual motivation. I think this was about Clark's own sense of inadequacy, his desire for control, and his inability to check his anger/rage. Sadly, he took it all out on Annie Le, certainly in part because she was small and he could control her. Clark is a "dick" in every sense of the word.

it was not a fight to death over how to care for mice; clark only used that as pretext to get her to meet him; I can guess his real reason; however, both sides would want to downplay that angle at the moment

I expect his lawyer to plead self defence, that they quarrelled over mice and she attacked him first, leaving scratches, and he unintentionally killed her in a rage; I also guess the DA and the girl's family would go along with the story, instead of digging up details in order to prove a darker motive

I agree with yuen -- Clark's text to Annie was a pretext to get her to come to the lab that Tuesday. As for the real motive for killing her, I'm undecided at this point. But I do not think it was the care of lab mice...

>>> it was not a fight to death over how to care for mice; clark only used
>>> that as pretext to get her to meet him; I can guess his real reason;
>>> however, both sides would want to downplay that angle at the moment

Okay, let's assume Clark sent her that email to lure her to the lab and do her bodily harm. He sends her an email (traceable), walks past the security cameras (traceable), and logs his entry / exit via the computerized access system (traceable). That's the part that makes no sense to me. He worked in the lab; he must have known about the security system. He picked the absolutely WORST possible venue to commit a crime or try to hide a body. If he wanted to rape or murder her, it would have been far more intelligent to stalk her and do it -away- from campus. Or at the very least, lure her to the lab after normal work hours!

Now perhaps I'm overestimating his intelligence, or maybe he is such a sociopath that he truly thought he could get away with it. But the fact that the murder happened in the lab during normal work hours leads me to believe it truly was a purely impulsive act brought on by a fit of rage.

I've read reports that his key card records showed that he entered many different rooms on the day of the murder. I can imagine that he would be frantically trying to dispose of her body, and going from room to room looking for a hiding place. In other words, no advance planning whatsoever.

Presumption of innocence, anybody?

I think his reaction was impulsive, but I don't think - from the character descriptions I've read thus far - that Annie was in any way condescending. Upholding the argument that she may have treated him like dirt is lame - you're trying to make the culprit the victim.

well all I know is there is a position open at the university for a janitor now.

I think he wanted her sexually and when she turned him down, he lost it. She had pretty tatas.

I think he wanted some of that slanted stuff. He looks like a dufus dork that can't get a girl.