Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: About Fafis...

Author: Dan Honeycutt

Date: 16:26:18 05/30/05

Go up one level in this thread


On May 30, 2005 at 12:50:08, David Dahlem wrote:

>
>>Like I mentioned in another post , there are lot of innocent people who get
>>convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence
>
>There seems to be some kind of idea that 'circumstantial' evidence is 'weak'
>evidence. In fact, that is not the case!
>
>Regards
>Dave
>
Hi Dave:

Completely off the topic, but your comment reminded me of a story told by a
judge once when I served jury duty.

You bake a chocolate cake and tell your children, a little boy and a little
girl, to leave it alone.  Sometime later you return to the kitchen to find a big
hunk of the cake missing.  The boy's hands and face are smeared with chocolate.
He says his sister ate the cake.  The girl's hands and face are clean.

The evidence against the boy is circumstantial.  The evidence against the girl
is direct.  Who do you believe?

Best
Dan H.



This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.