But a confession is not a neutral document.
Watson controlled the narrative in the letter. He decided which events to emphasize, how to characterize the victims and how to present his own motives. News reports could corroborate the killings; they could not independently verify every statement about what was said, perceived or intended immediately before them.
The Public Reaction Was Real
There is evidence that Watson attracted considerable public support.
Social-media posts called him a hero. His name and prison identification information circulated online. Secondary reports said people attempted to place money into his inmate trust or commissary account and that the ability to send funds using his number was blocked.
Watson also referred to the support in a later interview. While being held in segregated housing, he said that the reaction had lifted his spirits.
Those details establish that the response was not invented from nothing.
They do not establish its exact size.
Public support can take many forms: comments, shares, messages to news outlets, letters sent to a prison, attempts to deposit money or actual completed deposits. Viral posts often combine all these activities into one number even though they are not equivalent.
Ten thousand approving comments would not prove that ten thousand people wrote letters. Hundreds of attempted donations would not mean hundreds of deposits were accepted. Repeated posts by the same account would not represent separate supporters.
The image provides no source, records or methodology for its “thousands” claim.
Were Thousands of Letters and Donations Sent?
Based on the accessible reporting, that number cannot be verified.
Contemporary articles documented support in general terms. Reports about commissary deposits indicated that people had tried to send money and that restrictions were placed on the process. Watson himself acknowledged receiving or becoming aware of encouragement.
What is missing is a verifiable count.
There is no publicly cited CDCR ledger showing thousands of donors. There is no documented count of incoming letters. There is no statement from prison officials confirming that thousands of people contacted Watson. Nor does the viral image explain whether “thousands” refers to letters, donors, social-media comments or a combined estimate.
It is possible that a large volume of mail or attempted donations existed. Absence of a public count does not prove the number was small.
But fact-checking requires more than plausibility.
When a post presents a specific magnitude as fact, the burden is on the claimant to provide evidence. Until a prison record, credible contemporaneous report or attributable official confirms the number, “thousands” should be treated as an unsupported embellishment.
How an Uncounted Reaction Becomes “Thousands”
This kind of exaggeration often develops through repetition rather than a single deliberate fabrication.
An early report may say Watson received “an outpouring of support.” Another article may report that people were sending him money. Social-media users then describe “hundreds” of supporters because the story appears popular.