RE: Evidence to Convict?
August 3, 2017 at 12:22 pm
(This post was last modified: August 3, 2017 at 12:29 pm by Mister Agenda.)
RoadRunner79 Wrote:Mister Agenda Wrote:No. The injured victim and the chair used to bludgeon him are the evidences of the act.
Yes, but doesn't tell who did it?
Nope, but that's not what you asked, is it?
How many ways do I have to say that once it's been established that a crime has occurred and there are accusations/claims/testimonies as to 'who done it', and that testimony has been supported by analysis, comparison, research into the character, biases, and reliability of the accusers; and survived cross-examination by the defense; that it's reasonable to accept the testimonies/claims as very probably true, and therefore reasonable to convict?
Isn't that what you should have before you convict? Evidence that the testimonies are consistent with the available physical evidence (victim and chair) and not from people likely to lie about it or be mistaken or motivated to spin their testimony against the accused? Good reasons to think that the testimony of the accusers is independent and without collusion and plausible? Those things aren't internal to the accounts. They're things that support an evaluation that the testimony is more likely to be true. In other words, evidence.
RoadRunner79 Wrote:Mister Agenda Wrote:Are you claiming that I have tried to evade your point?
Are you trying to change the scenario to not deal with a conclusion based primarily on witness testimony?
Speaking of evasion, that's what you're doing here with my question about whether you are claiming that I have tried to evade your point. That I have not tried to change the scenario in that fashion or for that reason is immaterial to whether you are claiming I did.
RR, to MA: People are changing my scenario to evade my point!
MA, to RR: Are you claiming that I have tried to evade your point?
RR, to MA, seemingly: If you say you were, I'm claiming that you did; but if you say you weren't, I'm not claiming that you did....
RoadRunner79 Wrote:Are you saying that there is evidence that I did it?
I am saying that there is evidence that makes it more reasonable to accept the claim that you did it.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.