Originally posted by erobitha
View Post
The logic of his premise is independent of the evidence.
From your perspective, you think Jones is sidestepping the watch. But he explains why he is doing that--because logic and commonsense dictates that if the diary falls, the watch also falls.
You still haven't show why this isn't true, and indeed, you just acknowledge that it does, indeed, "make sense."
I think it is time to move on. But no one said anything about the Johnsons having "liaised" with Barrett. The diary had been in the newspapers.
Leave a comment: