The physical evidence does exist. Why was there a pliers on the boat, with one of Laci's hairs stuck in it? She was never in that boat. She didn't know he had bought it, only 10 days before she died. In any case, she was prone to sea-sickness and had no interest in boating.
Let's not forget the little clue that her body and her son's body washed up right in the area where he went fishing when he dumped Laci overboard.
Where are the missing cement anchors? Scott poured cement to make home-made anchors, which he later could not account for.
His behavior after Laci disappeared points to his guilt, to his knowledge that she was not coming back. He tried to put their house on the market 10 days after she disappeared, he got rid of her belongings, dumping them on the curb for garbage pickup, he got rid of her cats, he sold her car which she loved less than a month after she was gone. He threw away their wedding photo album, it was found in a trash can in his storage locker. This all points to his knowledge that she was not alive.
This is not innuendo. What you call innuendo is all circumstantial evidence which points to the husband in this case. Have you not learned that circumstantial evidence is much more trustworthy that eyewitness accounts?
Many many crimes are committed without any eyewitnesses, and people are convicted everyday this way.
This creep knows full-well that he killed his young family, and I hope he has many years to stew about it, before he meets his Maker.
