While I appreciate all the hard work, I really think those wanting to see the necklace, are just that, wanting to see the necklace.
The first time I saw the photos with the drawn circle on them, I squinted, put on my glasses, and thought... "maybe I see it!"
Then I realized I was focusing on the circle, and wanting to see it..sort of like those pictures where you have to focus and unfocus and maybe you'll see a sailboat in the swirls and squiggles.
I made myself just stare at the picture WITHOUT the drawn circle.
I see a smudge. It could have been dirt. it could have been part of a tan mark where the necklace was usually worn. Yet, I do not believe she was wearing the necklace in that picture. I really, really, really don't.
I am not afraid of being wrong, certainly wouldn't be the first time. I will admit, the snarkiness on the boards aimed at those who don't see it, almost made me hesitate to state my opinion. Those who believe there is a necklace is in the picture have become downright hostile in some posts
I decided to post anyways because I don't feel its right for those whose opinion is an unpopular one to be kept from stating theirs.
The defense presented this video as evidence that NC didn't always wear the necklace. It remains to be seen if the prosecution will attempt to refute it.
I don't see what it truly matters. I don't believe the necklace was broken when located. Why would BC remove the necklace to throw NC away? If he had left it on her body. he would have gotten it back when they returned her belongings to him as the next of kin (if he was worried about the cost of the jewelry) If he wanted it to appear to be a theft, he would have thrown the necklace into an empty box of cereal or something, into the garbage, and poof, gone forever...or if he had wanted it to "disappear" for a decade or so until the heat was off, I'm sure he could have found a zillion hidings spaces...from sunk into the bottom of a bottle of shampoo, to the spine of a high school yearbook..to buried in a hole in the backyard. What in the world would be the REASON to take the necklace off of Nancy and then toss it on a desk? What sort of bonehead move would that be? If it did break during the altercation, why not just drop it where he dropped her as further evidence of a struggle? It just doesn't FIT into either a premeditated scenario, or a furious attack. The necklace as a piece of this puzzle is just not working either way. It's a red herring. I really think sometimes a duck is just a duck, or a necklace just was tossed in a decorative box..for whatever reason.
IMHO.