Holly's theory is interesting but not really a contender imo. SY will have looked at it all the same just in case.
As for a non professional investigator solving the case eventually, I see no reason why not. IMO, identify Smithman and you have solved the case.
If Smithman is relevant how do you explain the fact the S&R dogs did not scent in his direction? If must then surely mean that MM was placed in a car close to 5A, hence the dogs did not scent outside the immediate vicinity, and then for whatever reason(s) Smithman left the car with MM where they were spotted by the Smith family?
Some here believe KM deceived investigators by giving the dog handlers items that had not been in close proximity to MM's body to enable the dogs to pick up on her scent. Although no one has suggested who they were scenting.
My theory/suspects does not involve any straining of the facts. Its simple the suspects had a legitimate reason to be in close proximity to 5A and had access to a vehicle; MM was placed in a vehicle very close to 5A (sorry I can't provide GPS coordinates
) and driven away hence the dogs just scented around the immediate vicinity.
Bearing in mind the dogs scent off skin rafts which shed at the rate of 40,000 per minute therefore any slight air disturbance will move these things about akin to snow drifts but the bottom line is the dogs did not scent MM outside immediate vicinity which just happens to stack up with my theory/suspect(s).
