(which is backed by by fact in this case).
In which case it would be interesting for him to set out the facts - having had some fun.
The report earlier referred to (which I have read in full) seems to me to be a relatively balanced analysis and the reporters did not reach the conclusion advanced. That would suggest that there is other evidence on which Sternone is relying of which the reporters were either unaware or chose not to include in their analysis or that the conclusion I reached was unjustified.
I would be interested to know which it is.