No, you usually rely on your opinions. Often based on statements considered out of context, misquoted statements, etc.
You are decribing your own MO not mine. You are the one always distorting and taking things out of context to intentionally try to pretend the stupid crap you say is possible.
Your claims are always as dumb as dishonest. You outright lie by denying Jeremy was asked things that we know for a fact was he was asked which would have been asked of Nevill such as Nevill's name, age, address, phone, number, who was staying at WHF, Sheila's name, age, the weapons at WHF etc. and evne more ridiculously suggest that time was saved by not telling Jeremy about Nevill's call and instead pretending no call was received from Nevill so asking him for the information again.
Who do you think you are fooling with such lies? Aside from people who are too biased to know which way is up, (who a living in denial to pretend Jeremy is innocent) you are not fooling a soul with your antics. All you have done is demolish your repuation.
Each time you accuse me of lying I produce countless quotes proving you to be completely wrong and then you refuse to respond because you are too much of a coward. You change the subject rather than address the evidence that backed up my claims and made you a joke for calling me a liar. Often you get saved because your posts claling me a liar are deleted and so are my responses that tore you apart.
Most recently you accused me of making up that Jeremy told police Sheila fired all weapons in the house. I responded with snapshots of statements from 5 cops he told it to and a Court of Appeal quote noting same. You hid like the coward you are until the post was deleted.
You seem to use your mod status to delete posts where you accuse me of lying then get your aarse kicked in by me demonstrating I was correct.
In his initial statement, he said called Julie at about 3:25, which meant before calling the police, not after.
This is a perfect example to prove you are a hypocrite engaging in projeciton. You project your flaws onto others. You accused me of taking statements out of tconext in order to distort the meaning but that is precisely what you are doing.
Jeremy asserted this call to Julie came after claling police. He claimed he received Nevill's call at 3:10Am and then immediately tried to call Nevill back but the phone was busy so immediatley called police and after calling police is when he called Julie.
Your claim that by suggesting his call to Julie was at 3:25 means he was suggesting it was prior to his call by police is an out and out lie. During his interrogation he changed the order at first but then deferred to his oriignal claim of calling police before Julie and then maintained same at trial and msot recently so far as we know reiterated it to Caroline.
The one distorting is you. The claim Jeremy called police at 3:36AM was rejected by the defense at trial. They even cross examined West to stress he was wrong about the time Jeremy called.
That is another thing you accused me of lying about you denied West admitted he made a mistake. You said I made it up. Oops you were wrong again:
All you are accomplishing with your lies and distortions is harming your repuation and proving you lack integrity.
No, he said he called Julie first, but then admitted he wasn't sure, but that his initial statement would have been correct. In that statement, he said he called her at 3:25, which meant before calling the police.
More worthless games.
Jeremy called police prior to 3:26. At 3:26 West placed Jeremy on hold and called Bonnett. That means at 3:25 he was on the phone with West and could not have called Julie at that time.
Moreover, in his statement he gave the timetable of Nevill phoning him at 3:10, trying to call Nevill back, then immediately calling police and after getting off the phone with police finally calling Julie at 3:25. he was representing that he was alreayd off the phone with police by the time he called Julie. you are trying to avoid the context and ignore th emeaning of his words to pretend he said said he called Julie first though he didn't.
Again all you are demonstrating is your dishonesty. You are engaging in the garbage you fasely accuse me of doing.
He called Julie first and didn't contradict that on the day of the murders.
He did indeed call Julie before police but he lied and said otherwise to the police, in court and even now. You intentionally ignore that Jeremy to this day maintains he called police first. You ignore such not because the evidece proves he called Julie first but rather because there already is no time for him to have gotten ahead of police for them to pass if he caleld at 3:36 but especially no time to do that and also call Julie. So by necessity to try to pretend your lie of a call by Nevill is possible you admit he called Julie before police but rather than be honest and admit Jeremy maintians the opposite you lie and falsely suggest Jeremy maintains he called Julie first.
No, he didn't.
He did indeed lie. You admit he called Julie first. If he called julie first then his claim that after trying to call his father back he imediately called police is a lie. He can't call Julie before police without his claim (that he immediately called police and called Julie later at 3:25) being a lie. The only way for such not to be a lie is if he called Julie after police as claimed.
Your claim he said he called Julie and then police after is a big fat lie. You twist his words beyond recognition to try to pretend he wrote the complete opposite of what he wrote.
So he couldn't have been trying to establish an alibi, as that would have been a valid reason. Another valid reason was to obtain advice as to what to do.
Trying to establish an alibi is not a valid reason to call her before calling police. It is the true reason he did it but far from being valid it helps prove his guilt. An innocent person receiving the call claimed to have been received from Nevill would not call someone to establish an alibi they would call 999 or would rush over. His actions deonstrate he received no such call from Nevill he made it up.
Waking her up to ask for advice is not something that someone in his place receiving such a call from Nevill would do either. Someone receiving such a call would either rush over to help or call 999 not call their girlfriend and ask whether they should do anything or just go back to bed.
You seem to think it couldn't have been Sheila due to lack of GSR (amongst other things). How come no GSR was left on her or her nightie related to the contact or near-contact shots that killed her?
The GSR would land on the hands and clothing of the shooter.
That is the whole point. If she were the shooter and thus had killed herself then she would have to have hugged the weapon in order to do it and the area where GSR is expelled would have been against her gown. Thus she would have gotten even more GSR on her than would someone just holding it in ordinary fashion to shoot someone else.
In contrast with someone else holding the gun and shooting her with it would result in the area where the GSR is expelled being not near her gown. It would be near the killer. The moderator results in the gun being even further from her body han would be the case without it.
