Well
I am open to him being guilty Jane it's just none of it seems to convince me. That's the problem isn't it with circumstantial cases it's whose story you believe. I would not have convicted on the evidence fence we have available.
I don't actually think that many people lied Jane but then again why do any of them lie in mojs. None have f it makes
Much sense
To make him innocent you have to make very sweeping excuses for his callous behaviours post massacre.
If his lack of urgency after the alleged call from Nevill fails to make you suspicious, there's his story to Colin about how Ann -allegedly- wanted to cover Sheila's coffin with black roses. There are his attempts to raise cash by selling nude pictures of Sheila to the press. There's his discourtesy in having Sheila cremated without asking Colin what he'd like -albeit they were divorced, she was the mother of his children. There's his total disrespect for the rest of the family in not keeping them in the loop over funeral arrangements. Whilst it maybe said that he wasn't on the best of terms with most of them, what about Auntie Pam, June's sister. Couldn't he have extended a little sympathy by acknowledging her loss? Of course, you can argue that none of this makes him a murderer. However, it surely must make you question his innocence.
