It really all does not make any sense . According to JM he went to all that thought about why he could not burn the house down, threw in the red herring about a contract killing and yet it appears from the trial he then made the basic mistake of leaving a bloodied silencer in the house .
She certainly constructed the crime well - mentioning all the possible questions that might crop up

It also neatly covers that it could be a contract - OR JB by mentioning the bike / etc.
The last paragraph about the fingerprints on the gun are weird - its implicating that Sheila was killed before NB as the glove coming off in the fight might wipe off her prints and someone elses prints? Who might they be.
I find it all very very strange. If in the long run it is proved JB is innocent then JM has an awful lot to answer for .
And as for Adams comments about her not being dumped? Its quite clear from her statements she thought that she was .
Also she does not mention having to ID the bodies and how she felt about that. She also repeats several times that she "Knew" he was guilty - it was only because she loved him and felt sorry for him that she kept quiet - weird .
I can genuinely say if JB is guilty I don't get her - I think it is wicked to go and see those poor children knowing what he had done - and if he is innocent I don't get her either , because this is a wicked web to have spun.