What if the eyewitness testimony contradicted the physical evidence to the benefit of the assailant? Let's say the chair has the supposed assailants fingerprints, the victim has a gash on his head, and the accused has the victims blood splatter on his shirt. However, 11 unrelated eyewitnesses can place the accused at a place and time that makes his participation in the crime impossible. Does eyewitness testimony have any validity then? Perhaps the accused touched the chair the day before, he helped the victim who had a bloody nose. The assumed victim has a personal beef with the accused.
God thinks it's fun to confuse primates. Larsen's God!