>>509578982 (OP)strange, i saw a link to his Princess Di article/pdf and became a huge list of aristocratic connections due to spelling changes and similar names. there was a link to his Dunblane theory and being from near Dunblane and being in high school when it happened, i read it. it is very poor even as far as conspiracy theories go. he put so much faith in his reasoning that none of the kids were real because he didn't like the was a classroom photo looked, saying it was from the 1960s because of some reason. it was only after i finished the article i looked up who he was an read his website where he said he is american. so how would he have any idea what a 1990s or 1960s school photo looks like from the UK or scotland? he also said he couldn't identify the daughter of one guy who is one of the main people who still go on about Dunblane, and had a picture of the man showing his daughters indivudal school photo and couldn't see the same girl in the class photo when it is obvious she is in the photo that Miles claims is from 1960s. so much of it was nonsense. he claims Andy MUrray the tennis player is somehow involved because his dad is called John Murray and there is a John Murray who is possibly related to the Dean of the nearby Stirling University or something like that.
none of it made logical sense.
i've read a lot of theories by Richard Hall and they all make logical sense even if some of the claims are not actually true by evidence and fact.
Miles' Dunblane thing makes no sense whatsoever.
it's like he found the list of british aristocracy and tries to make everything fit his idea everyone is connected.
if OP is Miles himself trying to get website hits, your school photo thing was so retarded to be embarrassingly stupid.