I made it plain that EM was the PJ suspect - SY had other fish to fry. So between the pair of them they might have eliminated a couple of options.There is no evidence to show EM ever committed any CSA crimes. In relation to MM, the only thing linking him to the crime is that he made a phone call on the evening of 3 May.
Tell me, which one of the witness descriptions most closely matches EM?
Elimination which allows progression in another direction.