reading between the lines. your poster doesn’t believe it, because it’s too pat for him. it’s too consistent with a certain narrative. the conversation could have certainly been pre-scripted between the two gay lovers.
i personally don’t believe/accept anything yet. too early. everything needs to be independently corroborated.
but, the presented narrative is at least plausible and possible at this point. what the poster doesn’t like can be explained by things like the alleged assassin being the son of a an ex-leo. the killer being motivated by ‘love’ (infatuation) is an old story. the grandpa’s gun being used because the killer took it because he thought it was too old to be traceable, but he wanted to get it back to the family to avoid suspicion, etc.
obviously the narrative shows the plan falling apart when the killer couldn’t get the gun back.
He is NOT the son of an ex-LEO.
That information was debunked as the result of lazy reporter confusing the father with an LEO of the same name. His father is in the construction trade.