Detainee No. 2, Muhammad Assiwi: Yes, how does he know I'm getting there exactly, where did you come from? Where did you go from?" (P/20A, p. 5, paras. 21-27).
This is a discourse that ostensibly sounds like a closed discourse, but on a second reading it can be understood with a considerable degree of probability that this is a discourse in which the informant allegedly presented the defendant at the beginning of the segment with an assumption that even if the person who came to take him (Defendant 2 and Muhammad) knew him, and knew that he was a murderer, the question arises as to whether he spoke about it, whether he saw it at all, and later on the informant goes on to assume that Defendant 2 did not see the murder by saying, "He did not see".
Mohammed's answer was direct: "But he knows about the car... How did he know that I was getting there exactly, where you came from, where you went from?" Of course, Muhammad's words can be interpreted as a "rhetorical" question in the sense of, how did he know I was getting there? Of course, by practicing things.
At the same time, and on the other hand, it can be argued with a considerable degree of likelihood that there is also the possibility that from these words of Muhammad it can be concluded that Muhammad is saying exactly the opposite. According to this possibility, Muhammad, in his statements, in practice confirms the informant's assumption that Defendant 2 did not see the murder, but according to him, Defendant 2 knows about the vehicle, and he also knows where Muhammad came from (from the settlement of Hura), and he can conclude in retrospect that Muhammad committed the murder even though he was not in the secret of the matter, (and even though things were not planned with him in advance).
It should be emphasized that in his reply, Muhammad does not answer the informant as requested, if Defendant 2 had been aware of the details of the secret – "Leave", he knows about the entire plan and is involved in the details, and his answer actually relates only to two specific factual details, according to which Defendant 2 knows about the vehicle and the way it arrived at the scene.