[T'wit]

>> As I learned during OJ's trial, investigations are supposed to focus on more than one suspect.

You are correct in theory, but I can't see that there is any possibility of another suspect in this case. Michael is it. The one and only. He told us so in the most dramatic fashion -- all that stuff-and-feathers about when he heard the THUD, he raced to her, cradled her, tried to revive her. He was there within SECONDS! There was no time for the one-armed man to escape unnoticed.

In the old, immensely popular Columbo series, Columbo always zeroed straight in on the killer and never considered anyone else. I keep thinking that's what law enforcement should have done with Michael -- go after him the way a rat terrier shakes a rat.

I believe at the beginning he felt remorse and had an impulse to confess.

He got over it easily enough :-)

[syriacus]

I can't see that there is any possibility of another suspect in this case

I agree. But, post-OJ's trial, how can McCabe get away with

1. acting as though Michael is the only suspect and then
2. quitting the investigation just because Michael's testimony isn't suspicious?

McCabe is lazy.
If he thinks Michael's testimony is consistent, McCabe should be a good bloodhound and "nose around" for other suspects.

(Who knows what McCabe might learn if he doggedly questions people? :-)

[syriacus]

In the old, immensely popular Columbo series, Columbo always zeroed straight in on the killer and never considered anyone else.

Yes. I loved Columbo. It's been a while...

but I think he used to question the (known to him) murderers about other "possible suspects" in order to get them to talk more freely.