Political Crossfire Forums

No, he's showing how you are equating speculation, even reasonable speculation, to actual evidence. That doesn't hold up in court.

Get mad. He's showing perfectly reasonable doubt and you don't have to debunk it, you just have to accept that you don't have to be a retard to have had some sense of doubt. But no, you just want to insult anyone who sees the case differently from you.

Circumstantial evidence is going to be a large play in the Arias trial. There's no actual witness to the events other than Arias and no "hard" proof she was the one that took all of the pictures (that I have heard about) and no "hard" proof that she was trying to cover up anything.

This is why establishing a motive and presenting circumstantial evidence is necessary at a trial. Else no one would be convicted of anything unless there was a video camera recording of the events with clear shots of the people involved.