In order to believe George's testimony we have to believe that for the first time ever there was a major plan going on in his house for months, purchases being made with his accounts, items bought, guns bought he didn't know about, conversations happening he never overheard not one, mom didn't vent to him about anything or discuss something as she rubbed his back one night (had to mention this lol), he literally had blinders and earplugs on for 3-4 months. Then he happens to give his dad money for a murder truck, and doesn't ever ask what happened to it or where it was or why, doesn't want repaid, just hands over 2500 from his safe and forgets all about it. Then his dad is over the night of the 21st and it's the first time since at least before Jan of that year he's there and it's not questioned at all just goes to bed at 10pm wakes up and even saying he would have heard someone leave because he'd here them, never heard anything, never overheard it discussed after, never saw weapons being cut up, never questioned a thing, just assumed BCI is framing us. Didn't overhear mom, dad, or Jake say anything after the fact, told Jake he should have burned a laptop and I think it was a phone because he again thought they were being framed. Screaming and raging on all those recordings, even terrifying his son because BCI again is framing them. Then when his brother confesses that is the first time he had ANY idea there was a plot and all that has been shared was going on while he lived in a house and was by all other witness testimony and accounts equally as involved and connected to family meetings and decision making and voting on life choices for everything else and they heard it, saw it, and knew about it from before AND after the murders. Nothing changed from before and after.. still talking, meeting, planning, voting, and anyone not in those 4 were excluded from those meetings.
Then if we believe all that, we also have to believe that BCI is actually trying to frame him, Jake and Angela both were able to match their stories of framing George all because they had no deal if they didn't lie and say George was there. The prosecution bribed them with deals and basically is blackmailing them to lie so they can get all 4 of them and frame George because he really is 100% innocent of any and all planning, participating and covering up of this crime.
Now not only that we have Jake's lawyers and Angela's lawyers also agreeing to allow them to lie or be coerced into getting on the stand and lying just so the state can frame George.
Then we have the recorded proffer that George's lawyers and George have heard. They heard it. Do you think if Jake said my brother didn't do anything, didn't know, had no idea until I confessed at any point during that proffer that the would play it they would say that, they would be screaming that. If anyone said to Jake you must implicate George or no deal, they would have been all over that. Just because it wasn't played for us does not mean there is conspiracy where EVERYONE involved in this case is in on it.
Then we have George's lawyers who would have to know recordings don't really exist of him at the border, but allow AC to reference them and read from them AND they themselves even read from them, but there really was no recording or transcript where George said any of what was read in court for him. And because NEITHER side played the recording there must be something hidden on it that proves he was innocent and is now being framed? AND the judge would also now be involved because he would surely know if BCI agents "messed up" and didn't record an interview and is now claiming they did and both lawyers are reading from a transcript that never exists? He literally heard arguments over playing these recordings vs not playing them. I think if there wasn't actually a recording at all he would know that, the defense wouldn't have argued to play it. They have all discovery so if there was no recording, they would have said that was never turned over to us, but they didn't say that they wanted to play it. They can't play it if they don't have it and so why wouldn't they then say, judge we have no recording of that interview.
Do I believe someone in LE can mess up, yes they are human. Do I believe they would get on the stand and lie no. Do I believe if they did lie on the stand and the defense had any proof of that they would expose it YES.
This isn't a case where one mistaken or one bad apple would have been at play in order to create this "Framing of George". Nearly everyone in this case would have to be in on this and I just don't believe that. Just because we want to hear recordings and we think if there was nothing bad on it, then they would play it, etc doesn't mean there isn't a reason (other than they must be framing George) that it isn't played. When the defense could have also played these recordings, I just don't see how anything helpful to George would be on it or they would have played it also.
Thank you. I have always thought AW saw the writing on the wall after JW confessed and, I don't buy her, "I couldn't let JW take it all" act either, she didn't want to die. She said she would but she didn't when she was staring it down and didn't know for sure what was in JW's deal (btw,can you imagine what that felt like to G4 if he's innocent?!).