It certainly sounds convincing! Any reasonable jury would convict on the basis of that kind of detailed eyewitness account. The only problem is that the person who provided the account was nowhere near the Lady Ghislaine on the night that Maxwell was pushed, or fell, off its deck. This description is not of what actually happened. It is of how Mossad might have conducted an assassination operation if it had killed Maxwell. Moreover, the source himself is extraordinarily unreliable. He is a "fast-talking" and "controversial" former Israeli intelligence officer with a motive to get revenge against Mossad, which abandoned him when he was arrested by the American authorities. His "testimony over the years on certain matters has shifted". Yet the book's conclusion rests on this man's "could have", "might have", "should have" speculation.