And yet, here you are posting paragraph after paragraph arguing against what was merely a simple suggestion of an alternative use for the heroin. We have no evidence either way on what he will do with it. My comment was one possibility that for some reason you seem to be pedantically arguing against. Why didn't you just say, "we have no evidence for that, but it is possible" and leave it at that? Instead, you attacked the theory immediately with "She didn't see him take the heroin". Which implied that taking the heroin was the start and end of it, which is blatantly silly. Why have the scene in the first place if it won't be followed up on? You do know how conjecture works?