For one, his thesis shifted overtime, with the original conflicting with his final version as published in a book. As historian Malcolm H. Churchill points out, May initially accused Teodoro A. Agoncillo (who is not exactly a pro-Bonifacio historian) of 'inventing' Bonifacio but four years later in 1995, raised a ridiculous 'forgery thesis' in which he claims that the supposed forgeries done in collusion with de los Santos were made to "to present a more favorable view of Bonifacio than was justified, for the purpose (as May explicitly asserted) of sustaining the image of Bonifacio as a national hero." His forgery claim was also based on almost nothing but a deficient linguistic analysis of documents in a language (Tagalog) that is not his native tongue. It's incredible how the non-native speaking May who has a "deficient" Tagalog, as described by Churchill, had the gall to scrutinize Philippine documents.
2.) Sa yugto ng panghuli at pagkulong, at paglilitis ay walang hustisyang natamo sina Bonifacio. Pagmaltrato ang natamo si Supremo at kapatid na lalaki nitong nabuhay (noong dinaklot sila) na si Procopio. Pinagbawalan ang pagbisita sa makipot at madilim na bartolina, hindi nilapatan ng lunas ang mga sugat, at kung pinakain man ay "pagkaing hindi na dapat sabihin" ang binigay, ayon kay Alvarez. Ma-anomalya rin at patago ang ginawang 'paglilitis' kay Bonifacio. Kangaroo court martial, ika nga.