Originally posted by NotBlamedForNothing
View Post
Check all over these forums. I’ve never, ever claimed to know more about this case than anyone. I’ve never claimed infallibility. I’ve made loads of mistakes but unlike some I acknowledge them when they’re pointed out to me and don’t just duck away and hope that everyone forgets about them.
I don’t consider myself The Voice of Reason. What I do consider myself as is someone who tries to take a reasoned approach. I can see errors without assuming something sinister. I don’t go deliberately looking for mysteries and cover ups. I don’t have theories and then defend them at all costs. I’ve no agenda that I have to fit events into. I also don’t assume that the Victorian police were all morons or corrupt or both. I think that in general witnesses give honest (if possibly mistaken) opinions and I need solid evidence to believe that a witness lied (unlike Michael’s baseless assumption that Eagle lied because he needs him to have lied.)
In short I’m just someone who tries not to get carried away. I’m not the one claiming a cabal of pointless plotters. It’s unbelievable that you say not a word against Michael and his fantasy yet you respond to me as if I’m the one coming up with the wacko suggestions. This really is a rabbit-hole we’re in.
Comment