For almost two weeks now, I've been agonizing over how best to do this, and now the answer gets dropped right into my lap. They say he who laughs last laughs best. Well, I don't feel much like laughing, but here goes. Roy, you listening, pilgrim? I sure hope you are! You and the other IDIs out there, listen up, because there's two big things that need to be said. Casey Anthony will walk free in three days, and as far as I'm concerned, IDI shares the blame for it. Not all, of it, certainly. That case and this one have a lot of blame to go around: Supreme Court decisions that give defense attorneys too much power and tie the hands of prosecutors and police; experts who can be hired to say anything you want; and TV shows, movies and books that dumb-down jurors and feed them a distorted view of how the system works. But the simple fact cannot be ignored: IDIs' chickens have come home to roost. And why do I say that? Because it's true. IDI have preached to hell and back that a circumstantial case can't win in court anymore in the era of modern technology. They've argued that again and again. This is the result: child-killers walking free, maybe to kill again. The jury in the Casey Anthony case believed the nonsense IDI gives us on a daily basis: that circumstantial evidence is not real evidence. This is the CSI Effect with a vengeance. This is the LOGICAL, INEVITABLE result of IDI arguments. And NOW, some IDI have the unmitigated GALL to get angry because Casey Anthony walked free! They get indignant over what they have unleashed! Observe: That would be funny if it weren't so horrible. And that leads to the OTHER part of it. Roy, let me take you back in time: You told me you'd look into it, Roy. I thought you meant it. But then you admitted what I always suspected: that you were just humoring me, like I was some kind of LUNATIC ranting for your amusement! Well, it's not so funny, now, is it? Not after the jury foreman in the Anthony case went on TV this week and said that the jury let Casey go specifically because of Wendy's argument: that the defense cast enough of a guilty shadow on George Anthony to believe that he may have been Caylee's killer. Pilgrim, I'm not usually the kind of man who says "I told you so." But in this case, I'm only too damn happy to make an exception! I TOLD YOU SO!