I read once that when deciding whether or not to have a medical test run, one should look at the decision tree downstream from the test, i.e., if it's positive what do you do, and if it's negative what do you do? If they are the same, don't run the test.
What we have here is a similar case, in my opinion. The guy is long gone, and whether he is (in absentia) found innocent of all charges or guilty of the foulest crime, what are we going to do? Follow him to Podunk, Kansas, and throw him in jail? Post a guard at the airport and refuse his entry into Mexico? Are you going to base any policy changes based on what you find out after the fact? I guess you could burn him in effigy... hey, maybe that's not a bad idea. It worked for Larry Harvey (google him). ;^)
Christi, my advice is to let it go and get back to doing what you do best, which is running a great dive op and educating folks on the ways to protect the reef. We know the guy touched a seahorse and got into an altercation over it with a DM, and now he is gone. The rest of it is all "he said, she said", and really doesn't matter to what happens now. We are (myself included) flogging a dead (sea)horse. Well, the seahorse in question is probably OK.
I read somewhere else that an often useful mantra is "I am going to have to get over this someday. Why not now?" I use it a lot, especially in traffic. ;^)
