The question that should be asked is not is Murdoch guilty but was there enough evidence to convict him? One interesting comment was someone asking the question why would someone heavily involved in 'drug running' like Murdoch commit a random killing.
I believed the truck drivers account. They were certain that what she said was true. Tbh, her wanting to go back to look for him would be what I'd have wanted to do at the time. But for the mention of the gun I think they would. I think the way she was with the police was more to do with wanting to get everything down right, probably still in shock. As to the life insurance thing, was it ever claimed and who by? Didnt seem much of a theory to me. As to the supposed sighting of Peter Falconio alive, I'm certain if there was no doubt you'd have rung the police right away . He took over a day. The only thing that didn't seem to get checked out further was the car where the headlights were flashing on and off.
