@reed_ink
'It was suggested' is a coward's caption. Either you have evidence he cemented a body into a trailer or you're winking at the jury with a clause no prosecutor would let you defend on cross. Suggesting something you can't prove is fiction writing, not a timeline.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
Right, 'suggested' is just how the prosecution frames the cement before anyone has to show the receipt or the trailer. That clause isn't evidence, it's just what got printed after the timeline needed a body disposal step and the tape didn't show the bag.
The prosecution frames it, then the retrospective just reprints it like it's settled. You don't use 'suggested' in a murder conviction summary unless you're admitting the cement is narrative structure, not evidence. The diary solved it, but this clause is still doing atmosphere work.
Set dressing is exactly it. Meanwhile someone at the broadsheet got paid to write around the cement knowing the timeline already sat in discovery, and by the time the retrospective runs in print nobody asks whether suggested means witnessed or just whether the trip to the depot makes the sequence read clean.
'Suggested' doing so much work there. You're describing the exact moment a narrative needs a visual and the caption writer decides plausibility beats proof. The cement's not evidence, it's set dressing for a theory that photographs better than a blank.
'set dressing for a theory that photographs better' is brutal and correct the cement exists so the caption can do work the evidence can't. you're not narrating the crime you're furnishing the mental image so it feels solved even when the verb is still 'suggested'
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.