>>friend has GSR on her hands, Tory had none;
>
>this has been proven false. both tory and megs friend tested
>poz for gsr.
>https://twitter.com/Nancy__Dillon/status/1602358156926930944

1) Why would Meg's friend have GSR on her hands? Who was she shooting at? Tory? Doesn't make sense. What DOES make sense...Tory slid her the burner to pop Meg, then got it back from her afterward. And because it was Tory's gun...easy to point the finger at him.

>why would meg say her friend shot her? megs friend is a
>witness for the *prosecution* that is testifying that tory was
>the one that shot meg. thats 2 witnesses at the scene (who no
>longer get along) that both claim tory was the one firing the
>gun.

1) Meg and her friend supposedly came to blows over this situation. So her shooting Meg in the foot isn't unreasonable given how foul Meg was allegedly moving (there's other stuff out there that Meg was doing this with multiple celeb dudes her friend was getting to know).

2) If Meg's friend did shoot Meg, her testifying against Tory makes 1000% sense. She gets to stay out of jail, she used HIS gun to do it, celeb dude might have enough money to get off without much if any jailtime and regardless of what Meg did, her and old girl got history (you know Meg paid for SOMETHING she needed at some point so, retribution).

3) Her + Meg vs Tory = he loses in court.

4) Meg goes along to keep her public image clean.


>https://twitter.com/Nancy__Dillon/status/1602395914953719808
>
>megs friend sent text messages to a megs bodyguard five
>minutes after the shooting literally saying tory shot meg.

Called covering your tracks. Easy.

>https://twitter.com/Nancy__Dillon/status/1602415524092252168
>
>and prosecutors are presenting evidence that tory contacted
>*three* different people apologizing for his actions
>(including a phone call apologizing to megs friend directly
>from jail after the shooting).
>
>https://twitter.com/nojumper/status/1602410729583349785

https://twitter.com/Nancy__Dillon/status/1602438192015310850?t=z4Q8Pxi2Sg9lprwuTl-Cfw&s=19

Who said he was apologizing for the shooting? He's apologizing to Meg's friend, no Meg. He could be apologizing to her for smashing Meg AFTER he had already started a thing with the friend. If that is indeed what caused all of this to jump off in the first place.

>things looking a *lil* different when you focus on what takes
>place during the actual court proceeding (the only place that
>counts) instead of speculation and sources huh?

Courts are designed for each side to present their case but nothing presented has pointed a definitive look at either side. The damning thing for Tory is that Meg's friend could be lying on him to save her own behind.