There are people out there who say it was not a stun gun (mostly, IMO, because they know the parents didn't own one) but they offer no alternative.<P>The marks were not caused by any "snap" or "button" - - they weren't that kind of injury.<P>The BORG will say no stun gun. They want people to totally disregard those marks. But we can't do that - - the marks must be accounted for - - and while they propbably ARE from a stun gun - those who deny that offer no reasonable alternative.