fran
Former Member
IMHO, doesn't prove the child did the crime. Too many other possibilities to declare the child the killer. Guess it just depends on how you look at it.
I'm not saying the boy is absolutely innocent. But it has definitely not been proven he committed the crime. In my book, more points away from the child. As a matter of fact, the new revelations give more motive for someone other than the child, imo...............a lot of people could try to revenge for someone sexually assaulted. Course, then there's Misty's psycho b/f. :waitasec:
I prefer to form my opinions from facts and not 'cherry-picked' sentences out of pages and pages of discovery. I take the entire picture into consideration.
We can just agree to disagree on this case until all the evidence is in.
JMHO
fran
I'm not saying the boy is absolutely innocent. But it has definitely not been proven he committed the crime. In my book, more points away from the child. As a matter of fact, the new revelations give more motive for someone other than the child, imo...............a lot of people could try to revenge for someone sexually assaulted. Course, then there's Misty's psycho b/f. :waitasec:
I prefer to form my opinions from facts and not 'cherry-picked' sentences out of pages and pages of discovery. I take the entire picture into consideration.
We can just agree to disagree on this case until all the evidence is in.
JMHO
fran