Jazz, let me rephrase it ... if you base your theory on murders that have been
solved then surely you'd find cases where there's a
direct connection between the perp and the place where the body was hidden or left behind, and that is undoubtedly the stuff many cases are
solved with. However, the rate of murders solved is between 30% and 80% depending on the region, the type of murder, and the particular official count methodology. Generally murders are practically solved within a short period of time, since a lot of murders are pretty straightforward. In 2007 one statistic report 61% unsolved murder cases,
here, more recently the number of unsolved murders is sharply on the rise ...
here.
Missing person statistics are much more disheartening because murders where there's a deliberate effort to hide evidence are much more difficult to solve provided that the methodology is driven by such factors as opportunity and cunning know-how.
Particularly in this case, this perp(s) went to a great deal of effort to get rid of the evidence, ... no fingerprints, no DNA, no eyewitnesses, nothing .... then why would he then hide Michelle's body somewhere where there's a
direct connection to himself? That doesn't fit at all this perp's profile ... does it? If the perp is indeed Dale, surely he must have known that the police would check, re-check, analyze, probe, evaluate examine and so on, all that was his and connected to himself ... so why would he then
knowingly leave clues around for the police to find after he so meticulously got rid of all compelling evidence? In other words, if one anticipates to be suspect #1, why get rid of the knife, the body, the fingerprints, the blood and all other DNA evidence, but then bury the body in one's own backyard or any place where there is a somewhat direct connection to oneself? And that is notwithstanding
whatever psychological and logistical advantages one might gain in operating within familiar territorial confinements. as you suggested. Sure everything is possible, human psychology is generally complex, true enough, and there's always plenty of
anecdotal evidence for all of it ... but surely it cannot be the default expectation, especially in this case,
yes? If there's clear evidence of efforts to confuse and conceal, then the whole of the hypothesis must follow that logic save evidence to the contrary, where evidence is the operative word here and where it's kind is of the established and not of the imaginary
IMO.
In sum, as it often is the case with his detractors, depending on this particular theory or that one Dale is portrayed either as this cunning perp so adept in hiding evidence or as this simpleton more apt to be pray of his emotions then to cover the tracks of his misdeeds which surely will bring the police to his arrest tomorrow, in the near future ... soon enough, and sometimes both in the very same theory, however, while almost anything is possible where theories are of concern, and understanding that almost always
it's neither black nor white but any shades in between,
consistency is nevertheless one of the metrics for sound reasoning IMO, because as they say, often times one can't have it both ways.