Originally posted by Fiver
View Post
On the point that Scott is making, I could see them having an investigation suppressed if it was potentially libellous and without sufficient proof. But if the theory is insufficiently proven by the known evidence, then there is a likely chance that they were wrong suspecting him. Or, as a senior man suggested, if the police in London had equal powers that other forces had abroad to hold people indeterminate amounts of time maybe they could have eked out a confession eventually.
I suppose the issue is really whether we think they actually solved it, or knew who did it, knew the man responsible, and I guess at best we can say it would seem some had their theories but none were provable in court.
Leave a comment: