>...This is pretty horrible, I don't understand how the charges >could be dismissed??? It's a legal technicality. Ever hear the phrase 'hearsay evidence is inadmissable"? Apparently, the killer was successful in flushing the ferret down the toilet, so the authorities had no body. And although the guy admitted his actions to airline personel, that's different from a confession to the police; their testimony of what he said is just hearsay. I imagine his lawyer stopped him from making a real confession. The law has a funny concept of reality. Things are only true if there is an unbroken chain of evidence and experts to testify. Truth becomes a matter of "convincing evidence", "evidence beyond a reasonable doubt", or a "preponderance of evidence" (these are all legal descriptions of reality). Believe it or not, this actually makes the system more fair in the long run -- it's harder to convict on the basis of rumors. But, assuming the initial press version of what happened is accurate, it's a real pity in this case that they couldn't at least get the guy for cruelty. --Claire [Posted in FML issue 4436]