Now i've kept my cool with you in this thread, and I shall continue to do so, but you're getting dangerously close to over stepping the mark with your insistence on point scoring over matters that haven't been implied by me.
Here's some advice, I suggest you take it on board - if you want to debate matters that have no relevance to what has been said by someone, make your posts stand-alone posts, so those interested in your angle can debate them with you. Do not quote someone's post, then make accusations about their view that are not present in their post. That's the end of the matter regarding you misinterpreting my posts - if you got a problem with that I suggest you pm me.
No, you didn't just imply it sir, you flat out said it. Here is just one example:
Sorry but no, you are wrong. Having an eyewitness isn't just one scenario. It's the ONLY WAY, short of self-incrimination, that the authorities are going to establish guilt and have a case to prosecute in my scenario. Forensics are moot, period. The authorities would have to establish guilt by eyewitness first, and only then could forensics become relevant.
It matters to me, not because I'm a bad person or have bad intent here, but because this false belief that you don't need an eyewitness to establish guilt in a dog-bit killing and can somehow just look at wounds and blood splatter or whatever the "entirety of the evidence is" in spite of an eyewitness to prosecute someone is the most disturbing legal notion I've ever heard of. It's completely insane to the dog owner, to the dog, and in light of the abject nonchalance I witnessed about the OP story in this thread about the dead guy laying on the floor, it's even worse. But it's even worse than that. Because in the case of a home invasion, the only witness is likely going to be the home invader. So prosecution of the victim of a crime for something his dog did is outlandish on its face when it relies on criminal testimony to prosecute the victim of a crime. I got accused unfairly for "blaming the victim" in the provocative clothing thread, and the pot is calling the kettle on this one in spades. Good day sir.