LolaMoon08
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2008
- Messages
- 7,138
- Reaction score
- 243
In that version of events, he was, iirc. I don't think it's necessarily fair to pick and choose which parts of the story are credible and which aren't. Either the father's story is entirely credible, or parts of it aren't (which would damage the credibility of the entire story).
There is something called "mis-truths" and "half-truths" that I have had the unfortunate opportunity to learn about from another case and that is where there is some truth mixed in with all the lies... so you do have to look into what could be true and what could not be true. Like I believe that "reaching for the phone" was actually "reaching for the gun." There has to be a reason behind them even mentioning George "reaching" for anything. Why would that even be brought up? Get what I'm saying?