If you can't trust all of it, you can't trust any of it. The murderer could include something in his note that casts vague suspicion on everyone (including himself, just to be safe), and then what would you do? Everyone would accuse everyone else, and we'd never figure out the murderer's identity. The only clue that can be trusted is the one given by the council of ghosts because they know who the murderer is.
Last game, when red blastoise mentioned we had to look at people with few ties to the murder note, I got scared. He's absolutely correct. You'll notice that I killed him the night after he said that, because I knew if I left him alone, he'd point the finger at me soon enough. Leaving Joeypals!! alive at the end was a dangerous move - I thought I could convince him to vote for whoever Gallade was, and I'd have it won. Instead, he used his head and accused me, and that was good game. I should have played it safe and nuked the one person who was ACTUALLY USING HIS HEAD.
The murderer is not going to be so dumb as to leave blatantly obvious clues in his note, and neither is his accomplice. I think you guys are way off base with your suggestions. Look at the murder notes I left in the last game. How many of them could be linked back to me, or Gastrodon? Like, one, and only because I intentionally made it so. Everything else--the colors, the bad grammar, everything--was a red herring. You guys have to assume that the murderer and his buddy are trying to be slick and leave clues that are way too obvious.
You guys did this all last game, too. You dismissed the council clues as being too vague and focused on the notes I left, which is the wrong thing to do. Have I ingrained this in your heads yet? I really hope so, because if I wind up dead tonight and you guys don't use the council clue to identify the murderer, I'm permabanning each and every one of you I'll be very upset =[.)