0

As I've been trying to decide which one, if any, of the following sentences is the best way to say what I'm trying to say, I was hoping that the writers/editors/grammarians here would help me do that.

  1. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. The account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.

  2. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation; it should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.

  3. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. Jurisprudence teaches that the account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.

I prefer 2 because it is more concise than the others, but I'm wondering if "it" following the colon is an ambiguous pronoun.

Any help would be appreciated.

closed as primarily opinion-based by Mitch, Jason Bassford, Skooba, Mark Beadles, 9fyj'j55-8ujfr5yhjky-'tt6yhkjj Jan 11 at 23:43

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.