I personally see one consistent pattern in the posts from Scipio. He 100% believes the EP in what they said in the September statements and also he 100% believes them every time when they said they made a mistake in what they saw or did.
And that is one of the main differences in our opinions , because all these "mistakes" add up to a different picture . IMO
That is because I am unbiased and think logicially. Many of the supposed mistakes police made were not even mistakes. The actual mistakes in the case have no implications at all. Why would someone type DHR/33 on 2 forms and yet DRH/44? There is no reaosn, there is nothing to gain from it being done intentionally.
The actual mistakes all have plausible reaosns for such errors and no plausible reason for intentionally committing them.
Someone biased will ignore logic and insist some ridiculpous nefarious tale that doesn't add up to try to support their position because that is how bias operates.
There is nothing to challenge the moderator evidence. Ther eis no evidence to estbalish the blood in it was planted. Nor is there a way to say the blood coudl have gotten there by accident. Jeremy supporters can't explain how changing the exibit reference establishes blood was planted, indeed it doesn't suggest such. There are just generalized claims of wrongdoing alleged as an excuse to say the evidence should be disregarded. It is an effort to avoid having to actually find a way to establish the blood was planted. It is just a way to try to ignore evidence that can't be refuted. WHile that kind of trick might work on someone ignorant it will not work on the courts or people who are skilled in the concepts of proof and evidence.
That is really the bootom line. The same kinds of games that have no legal significance won't work with me because I operate based on the same system that the courts do.
Take for instance what I see as one of the biggest fake claims of police wrongdoing- the moving of Sheila. There is evidence in the form of testimony and photos that demosntrate that after Sheila was photographed in the state she was found in, that her body was moved to look for shell casings that ended up being found under her body and the gun was moved and her arm was moved revelaing a blood stain on her gown where her swist had been so they took a photo of that stain as well.
What wrongdoing was there? Police have to move her body to search for evidence and take her to the coroner. A nonsense conspiracy is made of tkaing photos of her after moving ther though there is no valid one to actually make. A mountain is made out of something not even a molehill.
I want proof there was wrongdoing. I want evidence to establish who did what wrong, when and why. I am not operating through biased goggles where I see anything and everything as wrongdoing and then leap to the conclusion it proves Jeremy was framed though such doesn't in and of itself doesn't establish he was framed.
I want particulars. Who did what, when and how. If you don' have that and want to argue blood was planted but you don't know who did it or when then you need to prove how it could be done and evidence of some kind that it was done such as the blood having a preservative agent not found in the human body but rather indicative of the blood being from a blood sample.
That kind of substance is the difference between an MOJ being proved and just wild speculation and allegations about an MOJ.
