I'm still a firm believer that Terri was a red herring who (may have) made her own mistakes, but was a victim of a frame by another person who ultimately was insufficiently investigated.
Does no one else remember where the initial build-up against Terri came from?
How is it that (visual-theme-name I refuse to use) is acknowledged as untrustworthy about literally everything else, but not Kyron's case?
I just don't understand it.
Would you care to elaborate on your frame theory? To test the logical coherence of this position would require solid reasoning and supporting evidence.
Can you identify who you believe this perpetrator to be, or at least describe what evidence points to their existence and involvement?
When you describe Terri as a "red herring," are you suggesting (a) she was deliberately framed by another actor to divert suspicion, (b) investigators mistakenly focused on her due to circumstantial factors, or (c) some combination?
If Terri was framed, the framer would need motive, opportunity, and means. What evidence suggests another individual had (a) motive to harm Kyron, (b) opportunity to access him on June 4, and (c) the ability to implicate Terri?
You claim another person was "insufficiently investigated." What specific investigative steps do you believe should have been taken but were not? What evidence or leads were allegedly ignored?
Setting aside the source of initial suspicion, how does the frame theory account for the circumstantial evidence against Terri? The reported cell phone ping, the changing timeline narrative, the unaccounted time window, the alleged murder-for-hire solicitation, the failed polygraphs, Kaine's subsequent actions (restraining order, divorce, custody), use of burner phones? While these factors vary in evidentiary weight, the cumulative pattern requires explanation. Challenging the origin of suspicion does not negate the accumulated circumstantial evidence.
How does your frame theory account for DeDe's parallel unaccounted time, her extensive grand jury testimony, her reported Fifth Amendment invocations, her use of burner phones? Was she also framed, or does she fit into your theory differently?
What evidence, if it existed, would cause you to reconsider your belief that Terri was framed? Alternatively, is there any evidence that could confirm your theory? A forensically rigorous theory must be falsifiable.
These questions aren't meant to dismiss your position outright, but to understand its evidentiary foundation.