LogFAQs > #962666271

kind9 posted...

Apparently the area where he was found was previously underwater.

That's a very hard claim to swallow considering they found an intact suicide note. If you have a note submerged under water, how exactly is anybody going to read it?

And again, the claim was scavengers -- particularly canines -- got to the body. How'd that happen if he was underwater?

kind9 posted...

The remains matched his dental records.

You mean some teeth which, as noted, weren't connected to the skull. And afaik they only found *some* of the teeth because the skull was in such bad shape.

kind9 posted...

You have nothing at all to base your suspicions on except your irrational distrust of everybody.

Again, none of the claims add up, and the initial round of experts had zero luck. Considering the cops didn't want to investigate the case in the first place and the furor it raised -- since they had to discourage protestors from being near the house -- it definitely looks like they're just trying to close the case without asking many questions, which is the SAME approach from when they failed to investigate the initial disappearance.

Considering the family tried to cover up the crime -- and, by the way, was never charged with anything -- and then just "happened" to find the body in a place searched many times already, something feels fishy. And it's not fish because canines were eating the bones, not fish.