who is the most reliable witness.

[nugnug]

out of all witneses who is the most reliable and constant.

jeremy doesnt count becouse hes a suspect not a witness.

[lookout]

I'm afraid that's a difficult one nugs.

[nugnug]

yes i cant really make my mind up ethere

[Caroline]

out of all witneses who is the most reliable and constant.

jeremy doesnt count becouse hes a suspect not a witness.

If it's about reliability, Jeremy certainly doesn't count!!

[nugnug]

what ever your opion of his story he still doesnt count.

[guest154]

Is Nuggsy being paid to start topics? 

[nugnug]

yes both my and adam are.

[Steve_uk]

out of all witneses who is the most reliable and constant.

jeremy doesnt count becouse hes a suspect not a witness.

Colin,though he didn't say much at trial.

[Jan]

feel free nug nug 

I think it is a difficult question because the statements may give impressions of people that if you knew them in real life may not be true.

For example AE seems a very hard and determined person using everything she can to implicate Jeremy as does RB but she obviously could have been correct and therefore perhaps she is not vindictive , but moral because she did what she thought was correct.

However I find the evidence about the silencer confusing as all the statements about its appearance discovery/storage/handing to the police  seem confused and not consistent.

The testimony of JM to me (IMO) seems inconsistent and confusing and made to fit the crime scene when I think the police did think there was a hitman.To me her statements were the main reason I thought the case was odd in the first place. Was she reliable ? Only two people really know that .

[Jan]

actually I did not realise BW had not worked at WHF for only a few years I thought she had been around when J and S were younger . She seemed to change with the wind.

One person who should have known a lot was Pamela - did she appear at the trial? I only saw one statement.

[maggie]

Colin,though he didn't say much at trial.

I think Colin was far too traumatised to remember things clearly. I believe he was is a good person and very sincere but poor guy must have been completely out of it half the time.

[nugnug]

colins the most realible in that hes got no particler axe to grind but wether hes completly consitant i dont know you can certanly say he dident lie.

[Caroline]

colins the most realible in that hes got no particler axe to grind but wether hes completly consitant i dont know you can certanly say he dident lie.

What would be the advantage of him lying?

[nugnug]

i said he dident lie read the post.

[Caroline]

i said he dident lie read the post.

I read the post, which is as follows

colins the most realible in that hes got no particler axe to grind but wether hes completly consitant i dont know you can certanly say he dident lie.

It reads "I don't know you can certainly say he didn't lie"! There is no punctuation so it doesn't read how you think it does. I suspect the whole thing was supposed to say;

"Colin is the most reliable in that he's got no particular axe to grind but whether he's completely consistent i don't know, you can certainly say he didn't lie"

One looks like you're saying you can't be sure he didn't lie, the other that you're not sure if he was consistent but that he didn't lie. I can't know what you mean if what you write doesn't reflect it!