DrWatson
Verified Thoracic and Vascular Surgeon
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2012
- Messages
- 1,390
- Reaction score
- 9
I also saw the story on 60 Minutes. The similarities also struck me.
However, there is one HUGE difference - a body!
Also, we have motive, opportunity, injuries to GBC, statements from multiple witnesses re screams, yells, etc.
Susan Neill-Fraser had NONE of those. And the whole theory about the wrench was just that - a theory. Yet she was convicted, and apparently has so far lost two appeals.
I can't quite fathom exactly on what basis she was convicted, apart from the lies she told, and the perception of lack of emotion etc. But that's not hard evidence... it's not even circumstantial evidence.
No body, no weapon, no motive that we know of, not even any clue as to how she supposedly got out to the yacht and back, or how she wrestled the supposed body up the gangways and over the edge.
With Allison (to bring it back on track), we have a completely different, and IMHO more convincing set of circumstantial evidence, plus a body.
Awkward....
However, there is one HUGE difference - a body!
Also, we have motive, opportunity, injuries to GBC, statements from multiple witnesses re screams, yells, etc.
Susan Neill-Fraser had NONE of those. And the whole theory about the wrench was just that - a theory. Yet she was convicted, and apparently has so far lost two appeals.
I can't quite fathom exactly on what basis she was convicted, apart from the lies she told, and the perception of lack of emotion etc. But that's not hard evidence... it's not even circumstantial evidence.
No body, no weapon, no motive that we know of, not even any clue as to how she supposedly got out to the yacht and back, or how she wrestled the supposed body up the gangways and over the edge.
With Allison (to bring it back on track), we have a completely different, and IMHO more convincing set of circumstantial evidence, plus a body.
Awkward....