Originally posted by Elamarna
View Post
It goes without saying that the absence of an address for the Pickfords man need not be significant. But it could be. And I find the fact that every other person mentioned in the report has an address quoted intriguing. No more than that.
The point of interest here is that it "could be" significant that the address was not present.
In your post, you say that you are "astonished" by how a couple of different scenarios are suggested.
If they hafd been put forward as more probale than other or even as factual, you would be correct to be astonished.
But I think that it has by now been said a suffiient number of times that when a person is researched as a murder suspect, different scenarios will be looked into to see if the suspicions MAY (meanig that it is possible, not certain) hold water.
Look at it, if you will, as a never ending river of innocent alternative explanations provided by you and a number of other posters out here, a river that must be bridged by guilty possibilities.
The examples you were "astonished" by, were different examples of this kind of engineering - bridge building over your river of innocence.
Nothing more than that. Evidence that the suspicions have not drowmed in that river. If no bridge can be built, the carman is proven innocent. But no such failure to provide good, sound bridge material has occured.
To claim otherwise would be - you guessed it - astonishing.
Leave a comment: