*Mr Green shakes his head despondently*
I fail to see the issue here. If anything, a better argument can be made that Ms Wiggin is not being all that forthcoming with her information as opposed to Mr Locke. Locke on the other hand, seems to have given us as much information as he can.. A lot is being made about how truthful he is, while in contrast Ms Wiggin stays quiet.
I will state that it is highly unlikely that neither of our advocates is an innocent. I have crunched the numbers of several different scenarios, and by far, the best move is to listen to what both advocates are telling us. The odds that both are misleading us pale in comparison to the odds that at least one is telling us the truth.
It is indeed most likely that we have at least one innocent advocate in this decision, and it's actually not even that unreasonable from a mathematical perspective to believe that both are innocent. But given that there are probably non innocents amongst us and that the most effort is being put forth in questioning Mr Locke's words. If one of our advocates is not amongst the innocent, my feeling would be put toward Ms Wiggin being our non innocent.
*Mr Green pauses giving a slight shrug of his shoulders*
Call it, gut.
*Mr Green waves a flippant hand*
As of right now I feel much more strongly that we have non innocents questioning what should be a very easy decision. This, is very troubling to me. Also with the sudden appearance of Ms Fisher I would guess that she has something very pressing to say. Her silence as of right now is very concerning. Voting should be put on hold until she passes on the message she was obviously sent to tell us.