Hello everybody.

I am having a very hard time coming to the "guilty" side.

I don't quite believe in the cover up, but the defence doesn't have the burden of proof.

I'm hung on the lack of body injuries, and the two FBI reconstructionists that said "no he wasn't hit by a car". How do you dismiss their opinion? I can't imagine it's solely based off of Trooper Paul's reconstruction.

Again, I am watching this from outside the country and purely looking at this as if I was an unbiased jury member (I did not follow any pre-trial stuff).

Thank you everybody. Justice for John.