Usually one has too little information. Data! data! data! --- I can't make bricks without clay [COPP]. However, sometimes one has too much information.

It is one of those cases where the art of the reasoner should be used rather for the sifting of details than for the acquiring of fresh evidence. The tragedy has been so uncommon, so complete, and of such personal importance to so many people that we are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. The difficulty is to detach the framework of fact - of absolute, undeniable fact - from the embellishments of theorists and reporters. Then, having established ourselves upon this sound basis, it is our duty to see what inferences may be drawn, and which are the special points upon which the whole mystery turns [SILV].

The principle difficulty in your case -- lay in the fact of there being too much evidence. What was vital was overlaid and hidden by what was irrelevant. Of all the facts which were presented to us we had to pick those which we deemed to be essential, and then piece them together in their order, so as the reconstruct this very remarkable chain of events [NAVA].

It is of the highest importance in the art of detection to be able to recognize out of a number of facts which are incidental and which vital. Otherwise your energy and attention must be dissipated instead of being concentrated [REIG].

--- trying to separate those which were crucial from others which were merely incidental [CROO].

--- let us try to realize what we do know so as to make the most of it, and to separate the essential from the accidental [PRI0].