One thing that strikes me about this case is the sheer (and alarming) number of statements that were taken by seriously by police, used to obtain warrants, used as a basis for arrest, and presented in court -- and which are either patently ludicrous, clearly conflicting or have been recanted by the person making the statement. As I go about, reading and re-reading the various accounts, the various statements recanting former statements, etc... I can't help but see a terribly flawed body of 'evidence'. So terribly flawed, that I am very surprised any of it is still considered to be evidence. Of ANYthing. If it was just one person recanting, or one conflicting statement, well, that's one thing. But of, LOOK at how MUCH of the statement evidence is faulty, or plain false. The softball girls, the Hutchesons, Michael Carson... people who were critical to the WM3's arrests and convictions .. they do not hold water. Or have recanted. This kicks the wheels out from under a LOT of arguments for guilt. I have a busy-busy day today, but I intend to look at this quite thoroughly, including a look at WHY people make false statements.