With respect, I don't understand where the bolded sentence comes from. We have BM on the record through motions and exhibits, precisely and eloquently articulating his "side." It is all about avoiding and trying to suppress the factual allegations and related evidence, and asserting his procedural rights. This is of a piece with his lies to investigators and the press. While claiming to have hired "people" to investigate SM's disappearance and also representing to the court that he has an ongoing "investigation" through his counsel, he has chosen to avoid any honest presentation his "side" in terms of evidence of an actual SODDI or Gone Girl scenario. This is his right, of course, but he could have avoided the criminal charge entirely by being open and honest about the evidence he discovered.Hard to say if it would have made any difference or even survived motions. There are two sides to every trial and we only are privvy to one side. If they have the evidence and it can withstand cross or defense witnesses it might be used in another trial. I'm not too big on generalizations as lives can be pretty complicated when you scratch the surface.
Sorry, but I'm unwilling to accept platitudes and generalizations about complicated lives in these circumstances.
Last edited: