Matt Dalton shares his experience as an investigator in the Peterson defense case and exposes tons of key missing evidence that never made it to trial. Dalton is repetitive on purpose throughout the book only because there's so much that goes right by you if you don't stop to consider the factual timeline along with all the sightings & alternatives. These disturbing possibilities were never followed up on by police. Along with mishandling of evidence, an egotistical competitive detective, and terrible ethical problems with an out of control jury, a reader would soon be overloaded right into oblivion without Dalton's recurring reminders.
Moreover, this is a book about framing, and I don't mean in being "framed" (though that's always a possibility). The framing of a case takes place in the early discovery phases of an investigation. The police frame the case on an angle and that angle has a pull. If the story gets traction in the news, the media frames it in their own angle. Interactions between the police and media influence that framing of what they think, feel, and believe happened. If that framing of an incident is strong enough, it's already framed for the prosecution and the jury. But thoughts, feelings, and beliefs should not be what we convict people on in American courts.
Sadly, this book is already outdated, with more ethics problems since revealed, but it's still a great starting point to investigate this case. I've now read just about every book, watched just about every documentary, and even read some of the court files on this case, and regardless how we feel about the case, Dalton's book is a much needed recollection and argument.
No one can be 100% sure anyone is guilty or innocent, unless they're caught red-handed on video tape from multiple angles. The problem is what do you do with a person who has already been demonized by society via the police and media, yet there's no forensic evidence, dozens of ignored yet documented possibilities, and a very shaky timeline.