Thanks, Caz. It sounds like a good description of someone who might perpetrate a hoax.
How did I guess this response was coming?
Confirmation bias, anyone?
Mike's more outrageous, obviously false claims were made, according to Shirley, since his January 1995 affidavit. Not back in 1992 when David fondly imagines he was the model of sobriety and fully in control of all his forging faculties.
So it's equally valid to infer it's a good description of a shambolic drunkard making desperate stuff up in the wake of his world falling apart and not really expecting anyone to fall for it hook line and sinker.
And yes, that's also confirmation bias.
But whose is nearer to the truth?
__________________ "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov