Quote:
|
If you are asking me for proof of Saucy’s innocence I have none: that would be impossible (while he’s still alive that is).
|
Then let's find out! That is the whole point!
Quote:
|
Either we are looking in the wrong place, or we are looking in the wrong way.
|
...or we are flatly refusing to finish our lines of enquiry! What is so wrong about testing my theory? Even if you think there might be only one loud wolf, don't you think it might be worthwhile to try this line of reasoning rather than wimping out and going someplace else and avoiding (if you are innocent) what you may perceive as a hard choice? Is is not as if you won't have another chance to test your theory even if I am wrong.
I hope the above post shows why I am growing increasingly suspicious of Fordim. He seems more intent on playing his numbers game than actually looking at the evidence and making a choice. That way he can appear to be innocent and say it was "just the odds."
However, I am in no way encouraging that Fordim be lynched tonight. My target is Saucepan Man. I felt the need to point out the problems in Fordim's reasoning.