Maybe if you'd read my book w/ its hundreds and hundreds of case histories that show the probable involvement of humans i.e., classic mutes (NOT "muts") killed w/ firearms, every chemical substance you can think of showing up in blood work ups, every type of tranquilizer, barbiturate, nicotides, blood thinners—even mescaline in one AR case... Linda et al only talk about the 4-5% of cases that support their theory. I am intellectually honest and look at ALL cases (the majority being unusual appearing scavenger action.) Out of 200 cases that I personally investigated, around 40 were real cases done w/ sharp instruments w/ intelligence and out of those, 7 or 8 that were "high-strange." Do the math.
As far as my background... I was given instructions (and field protocols) by (and had a working relationship with) several veterinarians, two veterinarian pathologists, a hematologist, a NM state trooper, two microbiologists and worked closely w/ four county sheriffs. I have been a consultant for seven county sheriffs and a Native American law enforcement department of public safety. Listen to last week's
interview I had w/ John Greenwald maybe you'll learn something...
For the record, I'm not a veterinarian pathologist nor have I ever claimed to be an expert, but I know one hell of a lot more about this subject than you do. I also am an open-minded and fair team player who does not go around looking for data to support a foregone conclusion. I DO NOT attack other researchers, I simply call into question their intellectual honesty and lack of ability to work w/ others who don't agree w/ their conclusions. The proof is in the data Mr. Troll, not in our opinions or calcified beliefs around the subject.