An allegation of fakery isn't evidence of fakery. And it isn't sufficient to just say it is possible. That was my point with the flying bats. All sorts of things are possible. That is not sufficient grounds to dismiss evidence. But with unbiased examination of the evidence and background on the events, we eliminate most of those possibilities. It is not sufficient to claim plausibility with no evidence to support that claim. Is it plausible that this particular person lied? We don't know that until we meet the eyewitness and research his background. Then we can say it is or isn't plausible. A possibility explains nothing.