It cannot be denied that if the dates and calculations remained exactly as they are but the prosecution desired the later dates, Dusek would be perfectly content with the findings.
If you think not, you are really kidding yourself.
It is more than just interpreting the tetsimony, it is blinders and very selective recall. You see in a trial, as in any investigation or science or knowledge seeking, one must consider the whole of the data, and not ignore facts and strongly supported narrative that goes against one's foregone conclusion.We all do the sameMinion has reached a conclusion, he is not interested in the actual reality, rather each thing put before his Majestic Minionity is allowed if only it supports his conclusion and denied if it would break that precast idol of a conclusion.
Fortunately that is not correct. (You are trying, good-heartedly but foolishly too, to reach into the reason with a blockhead. You might better try sculpting marble with your fingernails.)Minion is like those dark age "ecclesiastic authorities" who banned Galileo for uncovering truths that did not conform to their approved worldview.
Dusek will argue that the date established by the pros. is the minimum date that flys would have landed on the body and that this is not the same as the actual date. He will argue that the bug science is not capable of determining the date she was placed there. He will also point to two other fields of forensic science that agree that an earlier date is within acceptable parameters.