If I say to someone:
I went to the store last night.
Then tell someone else I went to a drugstore last night.
Then tell a third person, I went to CVS, last night.
Then tell an attorney, on Saturday, April 28, 2012, around 4:30 PM, I went to CVS, bought medicine and pop tarts and then questioned the clerk...
It does not mean any of those statements are false. The last one simply provides the most details about my "trip to the store, last night."
I get sick and tired of the black & white arguments that say things like but he/she said such & such so they are changing their story.
If I said:
I thought about stopping at the drugstore, last night. That statement is also true.
However, if I later said any of the following:
I did not go to the drugstore on Saturday, April 29th, 2012 (note, how I conveniently changed the number of the date making this statement true but misleading)
I left point A and went home...(conveniently leaving out my stop at the drugstore.)
I don't like CVS, why would I go to a store I don't like, I went home.
All of these statements are also true but they are misleading or omitting relevant details.
You can quote any of these statements and say that my story has changed when in fact I have simply given the facts in several different ways.
Now, if later you question me as to why I was not home by a certain time and:
I say that the clerk short changed me and I thought I saw him pocket a dollar... that I had to check the receipt, so I was there longer than I thought.
Well, now I am embellishing the facts. I did check my receipt but not because I thought the clerk short changed me but, in fact, because I thought the total was too high. I've now added all of this because you questioned me as to why I was there longer than I said I was. Now we have something to question. Get the video from CVS, question the clerk, etc and compare notes.
The clerk said I questioned the total. He did not want to be accused of stealing...I wanted an excuse for my time change and making someone else look bad might make me sound even better. So what if the clerk gets fired?
This is the type of logic I see from many people discussing this case. Trouble is, when GZ hears of new witness statements, he tweeks his story to best fit the latest developments in his case.