Do you have evidence to contest any of the claims made in mainstream media sources that I quoted and cited for you? Your word is no good at this stage.
In any case, even if he's not a drug dealer (and I'm happy to be agnostic on that point) the accusations of breaking and entering, carrying knives while doing so and using a rock to break a window to gain entry stand in mainstream sources.
Argument by anecdote has proven popular here. I'm going to offer one, simply as a cautionary tale on the subject of "facts" as disseminated by the "mainstream media".
Please be patient, this isn't simple to lay out.
At the very onset of the Casey Anthony case her car was impounded by the OCSD (Orange Cty, Sheriff's Dept.) along with a bag of items which her mother provided, saying she had removed them while cleaning the car.
Among these items was a "stainless steel knife", a standard silverware set table knife with a semi-serrated edge.
I have mentioned before that Florida has a "Sunshine Law" which is any reporter's dream. With very rare exceptions
all public documents
must be made available to anyone who asks for them. This includes
everything released to a defense attorney as part of discovery.
About five months later Casey's daughter Caylee's remains were found a half mile from the Anthony home, and a couple of months after that a large (hundreds of pages) document dump was released by the OCSD, mostly concerned with the process surrounding that discovery.
This doc. dump included daily log notes of the OCSD officer responsible for intake and handling of evidence. The release consisted of scanned pages in a .pdf format, and there was not any particularly consistent chronology in their arrangement. When they were released the local TV station which had been making a major project of the case issued a very rushed opinion by their "legal analyst", publishing only hours after the doc. dump became available.
Due to an unfortunate arrangement of the pages scanned into the .pdf file there was a juxtaposition of notes about pulling the bag with the "stainless steel knife" from property storage for review by others, and a visit by that same officer to the scene of the newly discovered remains. The TV station "legal analyst" read through the documents in too great of a hurry, and somehow came to the conclusion that a
second knife had been found with those remains.
He wrote an article to that effect the very same day.
It was picked up on by
every major network, and repeated
ad nauseum.
Wise pundits Pompous windbags pontificated at great length on the significance of this "second knife" for days, even weeks. Months later such bottom feeders as the Nancy Grace creature, even when confronted with direct questions by callers about whether there was one knife or two were unwilling to make a formal retraction, but instead rambled off into incoherent evasions.
I never heard or read anyone on any major media outlet come right out and say "Nope, people, we were wrong. There was only ever one knife. We just jumped the gun and screwed up."
The
original article which started the silliness
is still on-line. There has been no direct correction by that source either.
There
never was a second knife. No one with any connection to any LE authority
ever said there was, or suggested it, or even hinted at it. However, if you choose only mainstream media sources, and accept them uncritically, without actually reading for yourself the documentation which their stories were based on then you can still easily come away with the unalloyed certainty that there was.
People new to the case continue to bring up that non-existent knife. They are more than willing to defend its existence quite passionately because they read about it in the mainstream media, and can become quite angry and offended when disagreed with, but when it is suggested that they read through the hundreds of pages of that one document dump to see the truth for themselves they can't be bothered.
It was still wrong, though.
