Earlier this month, Radar Online reported that multiple sources had verified the identity of the man who raped Corey Haim when the late actor was still in his teens.
The site chose not to reveal the name at that time for legal reasons, but a scathing report made it clear that the identity of the attacker was no longer in doubt.
For a while, it looked as though the truth would come out imminently, just as it did when Radar published a blind item about an HIV positive actor, and Charlie Sheen revealed his diagnosis just days later.
But the process of "outing" Haim's attacker seems to have stalled.
However, the story of why the name hasn't been revealed has left us with a number of new clues.
According to several media outlets, it's no coincidence that the press coverage of the mystery surrounding Haim's past began the same week as Corey Feldman's reviled Today show performance.
Feldman has new music to promote, and many (including Haim's mother) believe the former child star has been talking about Haim's traumatic childhood in interviews in order to drum up publicity for his album.
Haim's mother threatened to sue Feldman if he didn't stop talking to the press about her son, which led the actor to pledge on The Dr. Oz show that he would stop discussing Haim publicly.
Naturally, however, that didn't put an end to the speculation.
Shortly after Judy Haim's threats, Corey's best friend, Greg Harrison, claimed on Facebook that actor Dominick Brascia is the man responsible for the assualt.
Brascia denied the allegations, but claimed that he does know the identity of the guilty party.
According to Brascia, the assailant - who allegedly raped Haim on the set of the 1986 film Lucas - was "in his forties at the time," which would mean that he's in his seventies now.
That revelation took the blame off of Charlie Sheen, who many previously believed to be the attacker.
However, many are now speculating that Charlie's father, Martin Sheen, may be the guilty party.
That theory is based solely on the fact that Sheen fits the Radar and Brascia's description of "an A-list actor" who would have been in his forties in the mid-'80s.
There was no one in the cast of the film who would meet those qualifications, and the theory goes that Sheen may have had reason to visit the set due to the fact that his son was co-starring with Haim.
We should point out that there is no substantive reason to believe that Sheen is the guilty party, and his is just one of several names that's been bandied about on social media.
We'll have further updates on this story as more information becomes available.