What in my post #124 was conspiratorial, Kim? I mentioned nothing about a conspiracy. One doesn't have to conspire to perform an incomplete investigation.
As far as "answers" go, I think it has been pretty well established in court, that the reasons given for getting a search warrant for DW, were (shall we say) heavily embellished. To that subject, I believe we have "answers".
Regarding your post, you haven't limited your post to proven fact. Who are you trying to kid? There is considerable speculation in your post. JMO, Kim, but I think you remove and edit thoughts, theories and speculation, such as those I just posed to you, simply because they don't fit your agenda. Again, JMO