--- In [email protected], "Yifu" <yifuxero@...> wrote: > > The degree of evidence imo doesn't rise to the level of a criminal > conviction; (unanimous agreement among jurors); but rather a "preponderance" > of evidence as in civil cases. (or the ancient Roman system which had a mere > majority for "guilty"). I'd say guilty, 95% but why bring this up again and > again. It's about as water under the bridge as "Weiner-gate". and no longer > of much interest. imo.
I haven't read the book, and don't intend to, but for "preponderance of evidence" to apply, you would need more than one witness to the events because the consisted of personal interactions of two parties. There's no stained shirt, for example. L.
