Only the persons that were claiming a "Confession to a hoax" slipped up. They did not mention a second photo that was known to be part of the set, and the account did not make any allowance which could account for it. And the description of the supposed toy submarine model used was laughable, since it was unstable, top-heavy and could not remain afloat in an upright position such that it could actually be photographed. (The top part of the model is solid wood plastic but the toy submarine part was supposedly empty and full of air, with only a strip of lead on the bottom as ballast. In use such a model would tend to flip over to one side and stay that way) I am not saying it was not possible that a model could be made, set afloat and photographed on Loch Ness, only that the description as given in this allegation would not work in the way it was claimed to. Others have also stated that the materials claimed to have been used in the supposed model were not commercially available in 1934.
But it is not even necessary to defend anybody against the slanderous accusations and libel against the Daily Mail itself. It is unnecessary to mention that the alleged confession bungled in ignoring the second photo and in the description of the supposed model. The case for an actual incident of malicious action is void and there is no evidence that the alleged conspiracy to defraud by creating a hoaxed photo of the Loch Ness Monster ever took place. All we have is essentially
one person's say-so in a deposition which does injurious damage to the reputations of several private individuals as well as that of the Daily Mail, which is said to have overseen the affair. And the person supposedly making the alleged confession (to somebody else's guilt) was dead by then But ALL of the damage was done by the pair of researchers who have been pushing the story even though there were any number of problems and inconsistencies in it. If I were a legal expert of the Daily Mail I would sue them for accumulated damages in international media over the several years since the story broke.