Indeed! I've come across some internet indignation (on Anne's behalf), too, when going through reviews. You'd think nobody heard of subjective pov and unreliable narrators. Also: how often does Cromwell tell one of his sidekicks that it's irrelevant whether Anne is de facto guilty, as long as she's de jure? And then there's the passage where he tells Norris that if she didn't cheat in the king in deed, then in thoughts, and if not in thoughts, then in dreams, and so he knows her to be guilty. (That's what I meant when I said in my review "Cromwell invents thought crime"). How can one read this and still think Mantel wants us to think Anne is, as one fuming poster put it, "an insatiable nymphomaniac deserving her death"?