There is no such legal term as INNOCENT, People

Here's another rare photo. Pretty cool.

I got an email that I'll excerpt because it bothers me that people can't read. So here we go-

but I just wanted to say that the main
problem that I have with your theory of
Charlie being innocent is the fact that
he broke into the Labianca's house and
tied them up and poof....they were killed
an hour later.  What was his motive for
tying them up?  Was he just scaring them
and letting them know there was going to
be a creepy crawly going on later on in
the evening?  Probably not.




Thank you kind sir.  Except I never had
a theory that Charlie was
innocent.  I said that Charlie never
 killed anyone.  You see, he is
held up as the devil, yet he never killed
a single person.  I have this
theory because, well, it's true. 
I have a theory about the
brontosaurus, that it is thin on one end,
 much much thicker in the
middle then thin again on the other end.



Also, as a disbarred lawyer I can
state that when you are tried in this
country you are either NOT GUILTY or
GUILTY.  Not guilty does not
equate to innocence- you could be
guilty but there isn't enough
evidence.



Anyway, that's my theory.