I'm bothering because people like you, Baz and nugnug (sorry if I've missed anyone) actually seem to want to discuss the case intelligently and respectfully. I'm fairly sure there are others out there who are interested, who read but don't post - I just like to make sure they have as much information as possible so that they can make up their own minds.
Its not about trying to "convince" anyone of anything (and especially not Stephanie, John or Lithium) - I'm just here passing on information, correcting wrong information, pointing out flaws in arguments where I see them - people are, of course, free to make whatever they will of that.
If I don't do this, then it's all the false and misleading inforrmation that gets left out there, and that's what people are left with to draw their conclusions from - that just doesn't sit right with me.
SANDRA what is it you know about the Mitchell's that you told Stephanie about that is so bad it changed her mind.
You were bound to know that this would happen when you told her anything.
Sorry, I missed this. I can tell you exactly what changed Stephanie's mind about Luke (and about others maintaining innocence whom she'd previously supported) - Simon's confession.
When Simon confessed, Stephanie leapt to the conclusion that, since Simon had been so convincing that he'd "taken everybody in" then all of the others must be doing the same. She wasted no time contacting people (including family members of convicted persons) to tell them why their support of people maintaining innocence was misguided.
So it wasn't anything I said that changed Stephanie's mind, whatever she may want to claim now. I haven't spoken with Stephanie in more than 19 months
Sandra it's because of disingenuous statements you make like this -
"Its not about trying to "convince" anyone of anything (and especially not Stephanie, John or Lithium) - I'm just here passing on information, correcting wrong information, pointing out flaws in arguments where I see them - people are, of course, free to make whatever they will of that.
If I don't do this, then it's all the false and misleading inforrmation that gets left out there, and that's what people are left with to draw their conclusions from - that just doesn't sit right with me."that some of us also believe you to be 'sneaky,' as lithium has pointed out in a previous post.
I clearly said it was because of things you had told me about the Mitchell family that my opinion had changed. Marty's question clearly asked you what it was you had said to me about THE MITCHELL'S.
And you clearly IGNORED my previous FACTUAL statement and the question posed by Marty and instead gave a completely different slant on things - YOUR PRESUMPTUOUS, MADE UP VERSION!
YOUR VERSION where you try to convince others of FALSE and MISLEADING EVENTS/INFORMATION.
Hence why you make me laugh...
Though I say again - I do feel for those people that get taken in by your stories!
