that's just rubbish - all the time she says he had been planning it and all the conversations they "allegedly" had then he told her "his" plans . There was no one else involved - and she never reported him then - or even warned his family . And on the night she said she knew he had done it - no hitman mentioned . So she could have told the police when she went to do the ID.
Sorry I don't buy it.
That just demonstrates you choose to believe things that make no sense. When this is pointed out you whine like a baby, call the messenger rude etc.
It makes no sense for Julie to make up so many details of what he told her and when. if she was lying she would not have come up with such a detailed account. After they broke up he flirted with a girl in front of him and she thought this was rude and hurtful. To suggest this would prompt her to decide that he should spend the rest of his life in jail for a crime he didn't commit is pretty ridiculous. There is no evidence to suggest she felt so jilted that she would decide she wanted him to spend the rest of his life in jail for crimes he didn't commit. But even if she were so upset she would want him in jail rather than finding someone else to be happy with then she would have made up general lies that would be hard to inspect the veracity of. Not provide detailed account, which takes time to make up. She didn't go to the police with a story written down she told them verbally about the conversations. Just making stuff up like that off the fly is not easy or likely.
But more importantly she would just have made up him confessing to having killed them if she was just trying to frame him. She would have said he called her after it was done and told her outright that he killed them. Instead she suggests she had to read between the lines to figure out they had been killed. She said she asked for details later on asking how he could be so cold to kill the boys and he told her MM did it he couldn't do it personally he had to hire MM. If this were a lie to punish him why would she claim such it makes no sense. She would say he admitted to killing them personally.
You demonstrate time and again you choose to believe whatever supports Jeremy even if that means believing the more absurd explanation for something rather than the more rational explanation. You have nothing to challenge the evidence that Sheila could not have killed herself and yet choose to believe that the most vast conspiracy in UK history occurred to plant evidence and frame Jeremy.
While you assert it is because you are being rational that is not the case at all. you are doing so out of bias and intentionally ignoring the evidence and making up excuses including asserting the absurd happened time and again. Take giant leaps of faith all you like but be honest and admit that is what you are doing. Pretending you are looking at the evidence logically and objectively is not fooling anyone.
