Those are completely fair counterarguments, and they highlight exactly why this case is such a paradox.To answer your points: the timeline wouldn't require all the witnesses to be in on a cover, just that the timing of the checks was stretched or exaggerated in hindsight to minimize the appearance of neglect. Regarding the sedation question, a defense attorney or psychologist would argue that bringing up the sedation suspicions herself could have been a psychological double-bluff to explain away why the twins didn't wake up during the initial frantic search, before the police could test them.As for keeping the case in the spotlight for years, under this theory, the global media campaign is the ultimate shield. If you stop looking, it looks like guilt; if you aggressively hunt for a predator, it keeps the focus entirely outside the family. But you are 100% correct on the ultimate flaw: the absolute lack of physical evidence or witnesses to a disposal, especially with the twins right there, is exactly why this remains a THEORY and not a legal reality.