I thought so from the very beginning. Have never changed my mind. It’s the only explanation that makes any sense at all of all the facts that have been revealed..............
It states in the article that far to much weight was given to the “trace DNA” whicj supposedly exonerated Burke.
The investigators believe that that DNA evidence was inconclusive and erroneous.
I agree. I have always thought Burke killed her (accidentally, most likely) and the parents covered it up to protect him (and themselves).
Not of any particular opinion on this but....
There exists DNA evidence (and it is a well known fact) collected at the crime scene that has not been positively identified.
This fact always gets overlooked during these discussions.