- Dołączono
- 8 Lis 2016
The problem with the whole Mae thing is that different dates were being thrown around, and that matters for whether she could provide an alibi.I don't care about either of the participants of the Mae fiasco. I know Chantal has changed her opinion about Mae (as she did about the stabbing incident) a few times already. What stood out to me yesterday was that she's undecided about whether she does or does not provide Nader with an alibi. There are several different versions of the time in question: a) she was with him the whole time, b) she was with him BUT IF he did it he had to do it really fast, c) he had a friend coming over and she was streaming by herself at the time, d) doesn't know or doesn't remember.
Is this something she's been doing from the beginning? People like this are seriously dangerous. When you see frustrating criminal cases on the TV, where an innocent person suffers for something they didn't do or where it's impossible to put a perpetrator in prison, it's often because of witnesses like this, who change their mind depending on what suits them or whom they're mad at at any given moment. If your life never depends on a testimony of a Chantal Sarault, you can consider yourself a lucky person.
I didn't even know he went to meet Mae until like after. That's why I was so like "he was with me, that's bullshit". Because I didn't know he went to meet her.
mae.mp4
Wyświetl załącznik 2934453
This is the receipt for Mae's hotel stay, with the dates of Oct 17-19. The date initially in question was the 17th, and she was with him that day.
But it turns out that Mae didn't see him on the 17th, she saw him on the 18th.
And Chantal cannot provide an alibi for the 18th, because she was live all night humiliating herself for our entertainment.That stream began at 6:09 PM and lasted 2 hours, and she didn't go live again until 1:44PM the following day. In any case, even Mae said he didn't call her on the 17th.
Wyświetl załącznik 2658617