And for him to duplicate the conditions he must do the following:
Allow for DRYER than normal conditions (which accelerate fly activity)
Allow for close access to water (more food source from moss,etc on water surface,decaying plants) which provides increased fly population.
Allow for trash/garbage as MORE food source, providing an EVEN LARGER FLY POPULATION and places (inside fast food containers, bags, etc) for flies to LAY MORE EGGS on that food, CREATING AN EVEN LARGER FLY POPULATION, and (drum roll please....!.....!......!.....!)
A DEAD DOG CARCASS not a HUNDRED FEET AWAY from Danielle PROVIDING ANOTHER FOOD SOURCE, and giving off a smell that flys could detect for MILES, (the searchers said it was VERY STRONG), KEEPING AN EVEN LARGER POPULATION OF FLIES right NEAR Danielle.
I think her body was only there about 1 day before they found it. What do you think?
The Bug Experts have provided a reasonable hypothesis. Either DW is innocent or had an accomplice. Why would an accomplice dump the body in plain sight? So that DW can implicate him/her/them on the appeal?
= Reasonable doubt.