"Julie said Jeremy planned to kill his family, frame Sheila and say he received a phone call from WHF. Thus the claim he received a phone call was something he made up in advance as part of a preconceived plan to kill everyone."
For example if you take this in isolation - you are relying on the assumption that Julie was 100% telling the truth - and not in her 32 interviews been coached to aid the police in their conviction. As you are well aware someone was telling lies . It could have been Julie it could have been Jeremy .Both of them swore on oath . So one of them was not. If she was not telling the truth but thought by saying this to make the crime fit because she was helping the police " get their guilty man" then it is a POSSIBILTY if Jeremy is innocent that the call from WHF did happen. You or the police could not prove that it did NOT happen.
Also remember she quite neatly covered herself in her interview with the N.O. W - saying that he never admitted to her that he had done it . NEVER.
The 32 supposed interviews featured at least 10 times she had to just go review and sign statements that were typed up. Some others were when they searched her house and before she even told them the truth about Jeremy. The number makes no difference at all. Tryig to pretend it does and means she was coached into lying is a worthless claim that shows bias merely not reasining skills.
The fact she didn't ever say Jeremy told her straight out he perosnally committed the crimes is a big problem for someone claiming she wa sjust lying and making things up because if she were just lying and making things up instead of trying to tell the truth she would have had no problem saying he told her he personally killed everyone.
You can't come up with anything to suggest she went through great effort to make up a detailed lie blaming Jeremy and worse that she decided the best lie would be a hitman tale that could easily be proven false. Suggesting police would want her to identify a hitman who woudl be able to clear himself is especially stupid.
But your owrthless attacks on her story are even less valuable of course when the evidence corroborating her story is taken into account and all the evidence as a whole viewed. Then your attack on her flops even more which of course is why you want to take it in isolation and not muddly up the works with other facts and the truth.
