Ok, so I have about 3 pages to catch up on but...
I'd answer for 543 and say that the reason they're coming across like this is because ever since they expressed their differing theories/opinions everyone kinda jumped on them and haven't been really that kind about it.
I don't necessarily subscribe to 543's theories on the matter but I'd like to say that the theory they present is, to a great extent, as likely as any other at the moment given the *facts* that we have on this case. Just because we don't agree with them doesn't mean that they don't have the right to express their theories.
The general tone of all these threads is GBC did it. I certainly sway this way. HOWEVER how do we know that he did it? I've read (in this forum) of theories that suggest a possible involvement--he was an accessory but not the actual one who committed the crime. Sure, we all shrug and go "nah, no way" but why? I know that it's weird he "lawyered up" but perhaps that's because he was involved in a dodgy dealing that would result in his wife being kidnapped and murdered. All right, I think that's probably more prime-time viewing than reality HOWEVER it's a possibility given the facts we have.
The majority here thing GBC is guilty based on analysis of the one "interview" he did (and even I think there's something *very* wrong about how he conducts himself there) and other observations of photos and that BUT the reality is we have very little to work with. The majority of everything written here is pure speculation.
My point: I don't think 543 deserves the treatment he/she receives. It's a theory and so what should be done is shoot it down with *fact* or if that can't be done respectfully disagree.
Occam's razor usually wins out but it doesn't always. Just saying...and expect to receive flack for saying this but it's been bugging me for a couple of days so...yeah...I'm happy to go out on the limb.
Oh, IMO, MOO and all that jazz.