I'm not a scientist but I can't imagine any reason why a refrigerated corpse would start bleeding after twenty three days when removed from the fridge, unless maybe it had a bloody wound. Would falling off a sofa and banging your head (to death) cause a bloody wound? Possible but highly unlikely IMO, as is his entire theory.
Granted. Again, on the face of it, it seems like a right, old stretch of plausibility.
He's arrived at the only logical, albeit unlikely, conclusion, but won't have been alone in the process. It would have been ruminated upon by committee, then released.
Hence why I asked how was he so cock sure that it would stand up? Experienced as he was, he can't have known the intricacies of DNA transference (as Davel has pointed out at length), the relative decomposition (or otherwise) of a refrigerated corpse and the feasibility of logistics thereof, or the vagaries of the concept of 'reliability' of the dogs. Yet he steadfastly told the world his theory in great detail. Then wrote a book. Then lost almost everything. Then continued to propound the same theory irrespective. I know he's much maligned by supporters and why not, he's no role model, but he doesn't appear to be three parts mad to me.
