IMO, I sometimes see people tell stories that try and fill the empty void needed to resolve this case. most of the time, if not all of the time they lack any real proof behind the story. I am very skeptical by nature, so I need proof when people say things.
I see people tell the whole story based on things they have investigated. they speak for all of them, they just want you to rely on what they say. I find this extremely troubling. Blevins (1504) takes the cake on this one. not ONE of his witnesses have come forward to tell THERE side, or to confirm what he has been saying. records have shown that he lies, and takes things out of context constantly, so his credibility is zero.
so it's hard for me to just take the word of someone's story....proof is required...