Of course they had a reason to lie. They had decided to change track and get Jeremy - so with very little evidence they needed everything they could get - including elaborating what Jeremy said on the night so they did not look like fools.
If he was telling such huge porky pies then why did the police pick it up in his first statements. They knew what he had said on the night - so why not pick up the discrepancies straight away?
It seems to me your bias and conviction that he is guilty blinds you sometimes -You say you like discussion - but all you do is preach and never look at the alternative possibilities.
And I bet all the officers had another debrief before the sept statements.
DCI Jones was at the scene a half hour was convinced Sheila did it and that was the end of it for hi, he didn't care about the kinds of discrepancies raised to him including evidence that Jeremy lied about the gun not fitting in the closet with the scope and moderator attached. The police ignored all the red flags because they were convinced it was a murder suicide. That is why they received a lot of criticism- for failing to follow up on things they should have including failing to get a ballistic expert, biologist and pathologist to the scene because DCI Jones decided it wasn't necessary. They said someone higher than Jones should have been in charge and the fact that didn't happen was one of the problems.
There was no evidence anyone was seen moving and it is qwuite clear no one wa smoving, Sheial didn't commit suicide someone murdered her as well. You ignore all such evidence because of your bias but all your bias does is prefent you from facing the truth. It offers no ability to produce evidence that rebuts the case against Jeremy.
You have ZILCH to refute the moderator evidence you simply ignore it saying you choose to believe it was planted though you have zero evidence to suggest it was. You ignore evidence you don't follow the evidence. Myall had nothing to do with how the investigation was run his job was done when the bodies were found he jsut had to provide accounts of what he did and experienced and nothing more. He had no reason to lie and help railroad Jeremy if he actually saw someone move. Long before the police woke up and pursue Jeremy Myall already decided that he had not seen anything.
It is quite clear that everyone was dead before the police arrived. The window was open in the bedroom and police were listening for any signs of life including sounds. They would have heard any shots fired in the room. All of the evidence combined makes it clear she was killed by someone else then moved flat and left there before police ever arrived. Choosing to ignore this just means you prefer baseless opinions over well supported ones. What you choose to believe is of no consequence in a debate what matters is what you can prove.
That is why I rarely bother presenting my suspicions that Jeremy burned Nevill's back after his death in order to try to make it look like he was forced to make the phone call in an effort to lure Jeremy there. I suspect Jeremy hoped that is what police would believe happened but since they didn't come to the conclusion he wanted he had to deal with that. He couldn't make the claim himself or it would give away he was the one who burned Nevill with such intention. Just like he couldn't tell his lawyers what page he opened the Bible to and what the significance of the passage was because if he admitted he knew it would be evidence he was the one who staged the Bible for such purpose.
Since I can't prove these theories- I can't even prove the burns didn't exist before the murders- I rarely raise them even though they make sense and when I do raise the it is not cited as evidence of Jeremy's guilt. It is just raised when people ask for possibilities to explain these things and even then I rarely raise them.
Jeremy supporters often raise theories that not only are not supported by any evidence but worse make no sense and are refuted by the evidence.
