Of course people are going to see what they want to see, from day 1 there have been people bashing TH. Those people wont even consider another possibility. They take every little snipppit of information and twist it just enough to fit their thoery and then speak as though it is fact. No use arguing with them, you could have proof someone else took Kyron and they'd still be convinced she was involved. I don't know if she was or not, but I'll see some real evidence before I accuse her.
I'll disagree with there being enough for an arrest. But first let me say I do understand they could arrest her for suspicion, so when I say not enough evidence for an arrest I mean no evidence that will stand up in court. So IMO, they don't have any evidence to prove TH did anything to Kyron. If they did they would arrest her and let that evidence stand up to scrutiny.
I have a business partner. There are times when I feel we are in a position to make a big expenditure and she does not. Since we have always agreed that she makes the "financial" final call (she "does the books"), I accede to her opinion. That DOES NOT mean we have NO money, nothing, ZERO. It does not even mean that we should NOT make that big purchase. It means she made the judgment call, and our arrangement provides for her judgment to make the decision.
In the same way, the District Attorney decides when there is enough to go to trial. He is the one who has to try the case, and bear the burden if there is enough that most people see this woman as a heinous child killer...but a excellent defense lawyer muddles the minds of 12 jurors and gets her off...the OJ Simpson of Oregon. The fact that he wants "more" to go to trial...equates in my mind to the example I gave in my business. There could be PLENTY...but just not enough for him...the guy who holds that responsibility for a conviction in court.
It does not mean..
"they don't have any evidence to prove TH did anything to Kyron. "
That's like saying the fact my business did not AT THIS TIME make that big expenditure...means we have NO MONEY at all.
I keep thinking of that statement about the things that LE wishes they had not seen...things so appalling IMO that veteran LE were disgusted. I keep thinking of emails oozing hate toward a little boy who loved her. What DA wants to step into court with the slightest chance that the public will learn these details and this woman gets off...because, say, there is no body and her Attorney is a legal SuperStar?
I think they want to be sure to NAIL HER. But the decision to be patient...to try to find the body...does NOT mean they only have vague suspicions. They will go up against a powerful Defense atty. The DA who has to actually DO this...wants as much as he can get.
Likewise...Desiree's husband is LE. Certain information has been shared. Desiree is adamant that Terri is the one who has made her child disappear. Kaine believes this too. They believe Terri tried to have Kaine murdered as well. We can all agree THEY know more than we "sleuthers do."
The idea that because WE don't know it...means good evidence does not exist...is presumptuous.
As for the allegation that Desiree is doing all this because she is a "spurned woman"....that asks us to believe that justice for Kyron is secondary to this Mother than nurturing an old grudge. I cannot interpret the raw grief of this Mother that way. IMO her focus has always been on Kyron.This implies that Desiree has decided in her heart that whomever hurt Kyron..or has him...may get away with it. Kyron, if alive, can just suffer. This implies Desiree is only after "Gotcha" time for Terri at the expense of either finding her child or the person who hurt him.
And her new husband is on this mission with her? Really?
To believe that Desiree is so vengeful that she can only focus on Terri...requires us to believe her LE husband is willing, with the information he has...and his experience as LE.. to target the "Innocent" as well.
And it asks us...to think Terri's expensive lawyer feels an innocent woman should give up her toddler child...just for extra insurance when there is only mere suspicion.
I do not believe any of that for a moment.