So before and during the trial he did not say he had taken his gun home - its a simple question. If that is not true what date did he say he had taken the gun home and not just removed the bolt?
In writing he clarified the issue during the COLP investigation. What he verbally told police regarding the issue at the time of the investigation is obviously not documented. Police didn't record the interviews with the family they just had statements written up regarding points they wanted on the record for others to see as opposed to simply for the use of the lowly investigators in which verbal is ok.
The people at the higher levels want statements so they can show them to others and not have to just make claims themselves of what was told. In some instances those statements are made under oath others times not.
The newspaper knew he clarified the issue but didn't mention such and pretended he was claiming the gun was at the house at the time of the murders. he Eatons are the ones who took all the guns from WHF that police failed to take. They said AP's rifle was not among them. So the newspaper had reson to know the gun was not there thanks to the testimony of the Eatons as well as AP's COLP testimony. They ignored there was no evidence the gun was there and suggested it was by claiming AP admits it was there.
The paper had nothing on its side to defend their claim as true, that is why they lost.
