It fails to consider the possibility that there was more than one practical joker. It fails to indicate the degree to which handwriting samples should look alike in order to be considered of the same source. It takes for granted that if the handwriting on the note had been Miller's, then the identity of the joker would have been ascertained to be Miller. It provides no explanation for why Miller should be the prime suspect.
Franklin: The only clue I have as to the identity of the practical joker is the handwriting on the note. Ordinarily I would suspect Miller, who has always been jealous of me, but the handwriting is not hers. So the joker is apparently someone else.
Which one of the following provides the strongest grounds for criticizing Franklin's reasoning?