Attachment from post nbr 1029 by Seattle1 (thank you) in the media thread....
I still wonder what exactly the 'new evidence' is, given that the BAM was already, according to the autopsy a year ago, the 'likely or possible' (my interpretation) cause of death. Surely the fact that it was part metabolised was also discovered at the time. So what has taken a further year until his re-arrest? I know I must have missed something pertinent... could someone please tell me what?
I still wonder what exactly the 'new evidence' is, given that the BAM was already, according to the autopsy a year ago, the 'likely or possible' (my interpretation) cause of death. Surely the fact that it was part metabolised was also discovered at the time. So what has taken a further year until his re-arrest? I know I must have missed something pertinent... could someone please tell me what?