re: #555 sattv4u2

coould have been
or she could be lying

And even if she were lying, her motives would have to be known before a condemnation as I gave an example above

Yes, it’s plausible that almost 30 years ago she decided to claim a fractional Indian heritage then started lying about it. And her family is complicit in the lie.

It’s also plausible that family members claimed Indian heritage and she accepted it as fact.

Do you give equal credence to both scenarios?