> There's nothing in your posts here that tells me that you've reviewed the evidence that's been put forth[2] and rejected it, and it seems Snopes hasn't either

> There's nothing in your posts here that tells me that you've reviewed the evidence that's been put forth[2] and rejected it, and it seems Snopes hasn't either. I have debated that topic multiple times during different years. Yes, I am not fully up to date with the newest version I you were a police man and some guy came up and claimed to be a victim of a crime and you find out the details don't add up, well that happens. Now if he came back next year with a slightly different story about the same crime, yeah that is fishy. If he constantly keeps changing his implausible story you would at some tell him to get lost for wasting police time.