lawgator1
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2005
- Messages
- 75,041
- Likes
- 44,384
What I find ironic is that a key argument is that physical evidence overcomes witnesses yet most of the narrative of what happened had to come from witnesses and is stated as as fact of what happened.
I get it but it just sounds odd to state the sequence of events as fact as opposed to what our best guess was.
It very much reminds me of how we write appellate briefs. Matter of fact. The good and the bad.
