Wich2 wrote:
...And the point also remains, that there is no hard proof for that theory. None.

In fact, the complex series of writes, rewrites, shoots, reshoots, previews, and cutting tweaks (fairly standard, for the time) that Rhodes documents, stands against the simplistic concept of CUT ONE: BROWNING'S, LETTER-FAITHFUL TO THE SCRIPT and CUT TWO: LAEMMLE"S BASTARDIZATION OF CUT ONE.

-Craig
No hard proof, but evidence. As we've discussed. Gary offers an alternate hypothesis for the quote about Browning's disgust with the edit he saw on television, but it is only speculation. He doesn't address the quote about Laemmle, Sr. Your "simplistic concept" is a straw man, since as far as I know no one has ever argued that there were only two cuts.