And as I already explained, pointless debating and engaging with someone who continuously regurgitates nonsense and lies. Pretty much why I seldom respond directly to Faith anymore. Tiresome, predictive drivel.
Let's not leave out 'all' of the claim. It is that a parka jacket, in police possession was "hidden" from LM's original defence. So let's start with that. KC, a witness they say for the Crown had a jacket taken from his house. He has given statements, most likely had a precognition carried out, there is no "hidden" anything. So, it already starts with a lie.
It is then claimed that it is the thee jacket, the one that is missing, that it was not missing after all, that the police had it all along.( Just like the knife claims) Really, so as above, those statements, where there would be many questions in relation to that specific jacket. Also, IB speaks of such a jacket, one believed to be the same/similar to a jacket LM owned sent for testing! So now we have this jacket, she says it has been tested. Now why would that be? To eliminate it as having possibly being worn by LM, his DNA upon it, nope. But you know, it is what takes place in investigations, they get wind of something and then investigate and eliminate. So there will be no inroads, bar people making silly claims. More importantly a defence popping up with some jacket attempting to claim it as being worn by LM? - Already covered, crossing those T's and dotting those I's?
Now we can apply what is repeatedly being exposed just now, such as, taken a fragment of truth and building it into a lie. Let's see what we can do with the above here. A jacket was obtained from a lad, how? So they apply a warrant being in place for a house search. May be true, may not. But even so, just because a warrant may be issued does not mean that it needed to be enforced, does it now? Therefore no house searched under a warrant. - But surely you know all of this anyway, the enablers with their statement access, would know every fine detail of said jacket, if any warrant was issued/enforced.? Was it more along the lines of, why were only houses connected to LM searched, how many warrants were enforced? Why were no other properties searched unconnected to LM, that type of thing? We don't know, we really need to see it all
Now for the ID. Again, we can speak out of context here, apply some logical context around it. CD is being asked why he had not held an ID parade over using a photo ID. Because he did not have to, there was no legal requirement to do so with someone not under arrest. That in his mind it was unheard of to 'have' to do such a thing? He had not broken any laws. But again, we do not know the full context, the before and after, those two sides.
And as for the rest, bash on, honestly - You are doing an outstanding job putting in place just how mad each and every theory is. Where there is nothing logical in any of it, at all.