IMO, but what's the point of endlessly discussing the parents when it is JMK that is the current focus? I am interested in following the current investigation, not the historical witch hunt on the parents, that culminated in nothing a grand jury would even act on.
The parents as perps angle was exhausted years ago. Currently there is a new suspect and I am not in the least interested in rehashing what has been rehashed a million times before to no purpose.
I'm interested in what information is known about the current suspect and what publicly known evidence fits with this arrest. JMO, but at every turn your posts seem to do nothing but turn back to the parents as perps, ad nauseum.
You seem to be uninterested in the current suspect or any evidence that points to an intruder that the current investigation may be using.
I see your point. Do you believe that the physical and forensic evidence that has, as you noted, been "rehashed" over the years, have any bearing on JMK's guilt or innocence? Could it?
Let's look at JMK specifically. Since he has been charged (or will be) could the evidence that has necessarily already been discussed aid in a conviction? I would think so. Is it not important then, to learn something about what that evidence is? I would think so.
If that evidence exculpates JMK would that be relevant? I would think so. I understand what you're saying, I just don't think there is any way to dodge all that stuff, despite how much it has already been discussed, if we're talking about JMK's possible role in this crime. It is, after all, the very evidence of the crime he's accused of!
So, you're right, my posts do keep going back to the parents. But that, unfortunately, is b/c the evidence we know about has a unique nexus with them that doesn't appear, so far, with JMK. When and if it does I'll be all over it.