.
I would rather strengthen the William guilt theory that makes people happy because the current iterations are very, very bad and do not properly do the idea justice, and also because everything alternate is distorted in some way so a waste of time to mention at all.
I would rather strengthen the William guilt theory that makes people happy because the current iterations are very, very bad and do not properly do the idea justice, and also because everything alternate is distorted in some way so a waste of time to mention at all.
They aren’t distortions they are differing interpretations. Wallace lies, acts suspiciously, does weird things and yet still people bend over backwards to excuse or normalise.
Little is black and white. You say that it’s a bad plan so Wallace is either an idiot or guilty. That’s like saying Mr X is taller than Mr Y therefore either X is a giant or Y is a midget. But as Caz says not all plans are brilliant. The plan isn’t particularly bad just because we can come up with better suggestions now. And as I’ve said killers often think that they’re cleverer than everyone else. Did William have such an ego? Possibly. I recall in his JB articles him saying something like “I who have pitted my mind against the greatest chess brain.” He’s done chess puzzles from a book!
I fail to see how anyone can’t see Wallace as the strongest suspect let alone saying he should be dismissed. Look at PC Williams. He said he heard Florence messing with the lock but no bolt being drawn. If he was correct (and who could say for certain that he wasn’t) then Wallace is guilty.
I can’t tell you what to post WWH but I certainly don’t want to be agreed with just for the sake of it.
Leave a comment: