[SpookBrat]

You know what Meek? After thinking about it, I've decided I should be more fair towards Darin. As you say, there was no evidence. I shouldn't make it sound so much like he was in on it. I do think maybe he knows something NOW, and protects her. I guess it's one of those things we will never know. Plus, I wasn't on the jury and all I have to go on is "news".

Hope I didn't sound like I was beating up one of my best friends in here. :) Hugs...gotta go!

[MeekOneGOP]

Hope I didn't sound like I was beating up one of my best friends in here. :) Hugs...gotta go!

I never felt that you were. My post was not clear, and may have come off as being miffed, but I wasn't, honestly! I have thought about this for six years now. It's just so strange to have known or been acquainted with someone that was convicted of such a heinous act. Evidence being lacking, it doesn't mean Darin wasn't involved also. I mean, clintoon always said there wasn't a "shred" of evidence, right? Of course, he always burned the shreds, so he should know, huh? :O)

I just recalled, it's called the "statute of limitations". (Re: My memory lapse from my last post).