I've tried to set up a meeting with them and haven't heard back. So, technically, the ball's in their court.

He would have no motive whatsoever to set a fire. Mark may be the obvious culprit, as in 'the butler did it.' But I've played enough Clue to know that the butler never does it.

My understanding is they're focusing on everyone who was in the building that day. And if someone had a motive to start a fire and wanted to make it appear that Mark Anderson had started it, around his area is exactly where they'd do it. Mark Anderson had no motive to start the fire and is not responsible for it.

It's always been our view that there was poor record-keeping and/or someone was stealing wine from Mark.

The real important issue here is that when it got to the metropolitan area, it was weaker, ... They were fortunate in that they were on the west side and the winds may not have been quite strong enough to top the levees.

The real important issue here is that when it got to the metropolitan area, it was weaker. They were fortunate in that they were on the west side and the winds may not have been quite strong enough to top the levees.