[Positive]

"Sorry....Tides are a science. But there are variables. Get over it. You're just looking for precision...a GPS location on a pinpoint drop and a pinpoint pickup and overlooking the BIG PICTURE..."

Gotta say that my insistence on precision is in responce to Howlin saying in an earlier reply that another killer would have to know "EXACTLY" where Scott went fishing in order to dump the body so that it(they) would wash ashore "EXACTLY" where they did. My point is that Howlin is wrong about that.

"which is Scott saying Laci went missing while walking the dog while Scott was fishing 90 miles away....which leaves the impossibility of Laci being found in the Bay......"According to Scott"."

Clearly Scott's logic would be faulty and this faulty logic would not indicate that he dumped Laci in the bay.

Again, I repeat, I do not hold the opinion that Scott is innocent. I do hold the opinion that the evidence with which I am familiar does not prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Having said that, and not being familiar with all of the evidence presented in the trial, it occurs to me that the "preponderance of the evidence" may point to Scott, the preponderance of the evidence is usually sufficient in a civil trial but not (as I understand it) in a criminal trial (especially for a capital crime, I would think).

[onyx]

Please ping the person you talk about.
It is a courtesy here.

[Howlin]

Howlin saying in an earlier reply that another killer would have to know "EXACTLY" where Scott went fishing in order to dump the body so that it(they) would wash ashore "EXACTLY" where they did. My point is that Howlin is wrong about that.

You're still claiming that you can dump anything into the bay anywhere and it will wash up at any place?

Experts disagree with you.