It is absolutely absurd that people treat the testimony of a murderer (who, if he has any shred of rational self-preservation in him, is thinking ahead to his trial) about his motives as the *most* credible source as opposed to the *least* credible source
-
Show this thread
-
In fact I'll go so far as to say that the speculation of an uninformed bystander based only on the broad facts of the case ("White guy shot up three Asian massage parlors") is likely to be more accurate than what the murderer testifies about his own motives
2 replies 3 retweets 72 likesShow this thread
Even if he were earnestly trying to tell the truth about his motives he wouldn't be a credible source -- which of us actually is, even on our best days when we didn't kill anyone? -- but why the fuck would you think he was talking in good faith
0 replies
1 retweet
51 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.