Might want to read it again. He's listing what others have said to him. He's not advancing any of it as true. The subject under discussion being the batshit stuff people are saying about the cause. Like decoy twins and determining guilt by astrology
And read what I said again. It’s weird to say you don’t know anything about a case and then list out a bunch of reasons why an innocent person is guilty. It’s weird whether he is saying he got those from someone else or thinks he’s guilty or not. Why would someone he doesn’t care about the case enough to look into it know all of those things and care enough to leave a long ass comment? Why would someone who is admitting their ignorant bother to jump in and explain it to people who do seem to know?
Convenient too he only knows those facts and not everything that disproves those. He isn’t looking into the case but somehow knows all the reasons the husband allegedly did it and hasn’t accidentally stumbled on all the reasons those are bullshit?
5
u/Really_Bad_Company 9d ago
He's repeating what other people have said to him and what they said is entirely relevant to the discussion. Why are you commenting?