Jam, I do understand what the sentence means. The comma explains that rather than going to WHF to take a gun back, he PUT a gun back whilst he was there. But does that not strike you as being a curious aside, as in, why would it be necessary to say it at all. It might have been "straightened a rug" or "put away a cup" One has to ask why he went there the previous evening, if he didn't go there specifically to put a gun back.
You can probably guess that I don't all into your lemming catagory. I have infinite respect for what Mike is doing, he throws some interesting theories into the mix but it doesn't mean I agree with everything he, or anybody else says, without consideration. The greatest difference I can find between the two factions is that those of us who are pro Jeremy don't see him as any kind of saint. He frequently presents himself as somebody that I would choose to have nothing to do with, but the way we present ourselves to others isn't necessarily who we are and which of us at times, has not tried to impress others, stretching the truth and letting our mouths run away with us in order to do so. However, those who are pro family would have us believe that the entire group of the wider family are the personification of all that is pure and good. That none of them has ever had a devious or underhand thought. That they have never once thought about what they would gain from Jeremy's conviction, or lose if he found innocent. This simply isn't true. We humans are bound by the same psychology whether we're toddlers trying to take a coveted toy from another toddler, a schoolchild swapping tatty trainers for somone elses better ones, an adult defaming the character of a fellow job applicant................or relatives for whom it becomes possible to increase their wealth, but for one family member.
I think your description of Pros versus anti's (for want of a better description), is ridiculous, it's an attempt to stereotype, the truth of the matter is that there are fanaticals amongst both groups, and there are genuine reasonable people amongst both groups, to suggest otherwise is in essence one of my pet grumbles and it simply shows a tendancy to catagorise.
Take the title of this thread for example, it is leading, innaccurate and quite frankly the type of thing I have come to expect from certain posters (on both sides). If it was worded as a question, such as "hey look what I've found, what do you think this means?", then I have no problem, but that's not the case.
What is even worse, is that the original poster in this thread, spends a great deal of time and effort berrating other people for making assumptions and coming up with things that can not be substantiated or not based on anything of merit, but only if they don't conform to her views. Hypocrisy is king it seems.
