I'm simply not convinced that any author, when presenting "facts", intends for their lines to be read between when they're perfectly capable of stating exactly what they want the reader to understand.
Then what's the point in writing a book unless you've got the full facts of a TRUE crime ? Each author has turned their script around to their OWN way of thinking depending which author you TRUST. Why bother writing a book at all when these people claim that Jeremy is guilty,it doesn't make sense to me ?
The books are all biased towards guilt anyway,so that's what the reader s going to take as read,isn't it ?
Wouldn't you need such a thing as imagination when reading,in order to give opposing thoughts ? Or does EVERYONE believe what's in front of them ? It would seem so.
Yes,I give the odd quote,but it doesn't mean to say I believe it, I'm literally copying what's written. I don't need to !!