The burden of proof is on the accuser. One of the (many) hurdles they have to clear is to prove something that they were unable to witness. Now, statistical analysis would likely show that the odds against Biden getting that many votes, all or most of which were for him, were astronomical. Will the courts accept statistical analysis here? Honestly, I’d be surprised if they did.
The votes that were included because the PA Supreme Court and/or Board of Electors expanded the ballot acceptance criteria should be fairly easy for the Trump team to win because the court and the board did not have the constitutional authority to do what they did. But I doubt that will gain Trump enough votes to win 270 votes even if he ends up winning Pennsylvania. This is a murky war that must be fought on many fronts.
I’m trying not to get my hopes up, but I’m not giving up either. Give ‘em hell Trump!!!
Then I guess cybercriminals will never get convicted, as the evidence of such crime is done using statistics.
“Will the courts accept statistical analysis here? Honestly, I’d be surprised if they did.”
My understanding is in this sort of a case there needs to be “a preponderance of evidence”, a lower standard, rather than “evidence beyond a reasonable doubt”