Replies

Circumstantial evidence is not invalid evidence. In my example, do you believe discovery of the book on heiroglyphics is irrelevant? I don't, and I don't think that discovery of a book illustrating how to construct a meth lab is either. A judge apparently agreed, by signing off on the warrant. How does the fact that the piece of evidence is a book change its value as evidence? For crying out loud, the defense in the OJ trial was allowed to discredit a cop (Fuhrman) based on things he said (deemed racist). Speech, while protected as an act, can still be evidence. This ruling seems to be hinging on that mythical right of privacy.....