bastOn, to AA you said:
Logical argument seems to get you into a hissy fit.
That's just a little rich isn't it?
Most of us here are prepared to argue our cases, and highlight the weaknesses in what little 'hard' evidence exists.
You on the other hand simply have a dogged opinion. Based on what??? Expertise in DR? Most of your contributions here are terse digs revealing little cerebral activity. I wonder how much you really do know about this case?
You are entirely entitled to your 'opinion', as are we all.
Because matters of opinion are
NOT matters of fact! But 2 individuals should not be required to endure the opprobrium for this tragedy simply on the basis of someone's
opinion!!
Establishing a position by logical argument is rather more difficult I grant you, but many here have done so. Lord Philip will soon join us, along with all the previous independent reviewers of this case. Of that I have no doubt!
Indulge your childish 'crab bating' elsewhere. People died, grow up! This is not a lightweight debate. Discuss the evidence, (if you are aware of the detail!) or be taken for a cerebrally challenged troll!