In reply to Holly G Lightly: The previous thread had closed by the time I caught up this morning. Dicus' testimony about the behaviorist telling him it was probably one person does not bother me because at that time, they were operating on the theory that this was a normal abduction case. Standard practice becomes the standard based on what is typical. However, this did not turn out to be a typical case. Should they have looked VERY hard at Britt? Of course they should. But, even if you are suspicious of someone's alibis being a little weak, if you can't find any other evidence to implicate them then you should move on. Professional LEOs do this every day. I heartily disliked former agent Dicus. Not because I think he hates being proved wrong but, because I think his removal from the case and subsequent resignation left him with a lot of bitterness that showed clearly on the stand. And it seemed to me that he was relishing the chance to get in some shots at the institution that found him lacking. I was appalled by his usage of terms like Britt's alibis being "garbage" and something else being "ridiculous". That are opinions, not fact and I think it reflected very poorly on him. I think at the end of the day, we have to decide whether the evidence tells us that one man became wrongly fixated on Britt or the entire rest of the TBI became wrongly fixated on the A-train. Based on the evidence presented, I think the first option is far more likely.