(February 27, 2015 at 12:12 pm)YGninja Wrote: Imagine you are a policeman attending the aftermath of a supposed armed robbery of a shop. If all of the cashiers claimed the masked man entered the building at precisely 20:47, would you be more or less suspicious about their story than if they had given slightly varying times? "10 to 9", "about quarter to 9", "just before closing time at 9"...??
The differences are natural and demonstrate that there wasn't a conspiracy to invent the entire story.
The buy-bull "eye-witness" testimonies are more like this.
Witness 1: The robber came in about a quarter to nine, just before we closed last night.
Witness 2: Bullshit, it happened at 9:15, just after we opened yesterday.
Witness 3: Guys, it happened sometime last week.
Witness 4: We got robbed? Oh yeah, but that was a month ago.
Besides, even if you actually had first hand accounts, so the fuck what. Eye-witness testimony alone is worthless. Despite Wiggy's claim, no-one gets convicted on eye-witness testimony alone. If that's all the DA has, he won't even take it to trial.
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
