Exactly, the repetition effect seems to amplify certainty where none exists. That is why I wanted to keep this thread grounded in what is actually documented. If someone can point to a court judgment, plea agreement, or dismissal order, that would change the conversation entirely. Until then, all we have is an indictment notice frozen in time. It is interesting how often those get treated as final conclusions online. This kind of thread can at least slow that down a bit.What I find interesting is how secondary sites reframe government language. A short wanted notice becomes a dramatic narrative once it is copied elsewhere. Important qualifiers get lost, like the difference between an indictment and a conviction. Over time, repetition gives those summaries an air of authority they may not deserve. Going back to the original public record is really the only way to reset the discussion. Even then, it leaves unanswered questions.