Witness Evidence

[RoadRunner79]

This is getting rather silly. Are you really using the argument that we wouldn't press charges because our own memory that you shot us could be unreliable? Yes, it could be wrong. The chances of us being wrong are slim. You're now setting up a false dichotomy where my memories must be 100% reliable to me or else they are worthless to me. That's absurd, and you know it. Obviously, I wouldn't press charges against you unless I felt confident you shot me. If I've made a mistake, then the lack of physical evidence is exactly what will rectify it.

However, from the point of view of someone else who wasn't actually there, like the jury, they have no way to know that my testimony is true.

You're conflating what we know and what we can demonstrate, as I alluded to a few posts ago. If you're interested in the truth, then what you can demonstrate is all that matters. So if you shot me, then what is needed to demonstrate this is physical evidence. Just my say so, even if I am virtually certain it is true, is not evidence to anyone else. Surely you must understand this?

As I said before, why do you care about witness testimony? If we all just agreed testimony is awesome, would that be it? Is there a problem with the legal system you think needs addressing by promoting the importance of witness testimony?

If you found yourself on false charges by a group of people who all said you shot someone, I bet you'd be pretty quick to demand they also present some physical evidence.

So you don't believe the science when your own memories are concerned, and are willing to act on them then I see. You are correct, that we do need to demonstrate to others what had happened. And that is on the basis of all the evidence available to reconstruct what most likely happened. Their may be outliers, and things we need to put to the side which do not fit. This may be true for both testimony and physical evidence. That is why we have people trained to investigate crimes, history, and science.

If I found myself on trial and knew the testimony of others was mistaken, then I would want any strong evidence I could provide, that places me somewhere else or opposes the other evidence. This would include good witness testimony. How about you? Would witnesses be good evidence you where not guilty, if you where found falsely accused? I can confidently say, that I don't think I would want you lot on my jury.