3 ms·
You seem to be aware, at least on a subconscious level, of the larger point - as you've demonstrated by including additional evidence. The larger point being t
by woodman 10y ago
You seem to be aware, at least on a subconscious level, of the larger point - as you've demonstrated by including additional evidence. The larger point being that the absence of phone records can, at best, disconfirm. There are far too many alternative explanations for it to be used alone or as confirmation.
- rayiner 10y agoRemember, in court we're not talking about logical proof (eliminating every alternative but the desired conclusion), but statistical proof (eliminating alternative conclusions with 51% or 95% certainty). Given an assumed or established statistical model of the probability of related events (e.g. knowing that a secretary at a business makes a log entry 99.9% of the time when she sends out a mailing), a non-happening (say the absence of a log entry) can easily establish a conclusion to the desired level of certainty.
- woodman 10y agoDarn, I already replied to this point moments ago. There is a difference in the application of this logic in the court room where it can be challenged, and the juror room where it cannot - right?