3 ms·
Alex said they "have no evidence" it happened, which is classic slippery legalese. From that phrase it is reasonable to infer either that they have evidence of
by dandelany 11y ago
Alex said they "have no evidence" it happened, which is classic slippery legalese. From that phrase it is reasonable to infer either that they have evidence of absence, or absence of evidence, which are not the same thing.
- eastonhockey19 11y agoIt's standard wording for something like this even if they had 100% evidence of absence.
- dandelany 11y agoCorrect. It's the standard wording, whether or not they actually have evidence. Therefore we cannot assume, as you have earlier in this thread, that they do in fact have it.