I don’t have one innocent explanation nor can I come up with all possible explanations. The explanations I gave so far were just illustrations of potential explanations, some of them innocent, some not.
The point I’m trying to make is speculation about why someone did something isn’t proof of guilt. Evidence is proof, and until there is evidence everything else is just interpretation.
Okay, good to know you can’t come up with even one potential innocent explanation. You have offered two which are clearly garbage, and then retreated into this landscape where anything’s possible and nothing matters, just because in a vague sense lots of explanations might be possible.
Probably a good decision tactically. You may have a feeling that if you attempt to offer another innocent explanation it may be shown to contradict some kind of other clear evidence, and you may be right.
(Also, again, it’s relevant that Hasan is already on camera abusing other dogs, and that his attempt at an innocent explanation is one of those explanations that can’t possibly be true. It is legitimately confusing to me why those things are not important to you. Parasocial relationships are a hell of a drug, I guess.)
Anyway I am done now. I was just curious if you had anything better to offer.
It’s not tactical, it’s just how guilt is generally determined. Speculative testimony (like “I think he did it for this reason”) is generally inadmissible in court. Speculation about motives isn’t evidence. Offering my own speculation about motives wouldn’t count as proof either, so it doesn’t make sense for me to do that.
I don’t have one innocent explanation nor can I come up with all possible explanations. The explanations I gave so far were just illustrations of potential explanations, some of them innocent, some not.
The point I’m trying to make is speculation about why someone did something isn’t proof of guilt. Evidence is proof, and until there is evidence everything else is just interpretation.
Okay, good to know you can’t come up with even one potential innocent explanation. You have offered two which are clearly garbage, and then retreated into this landscape where anything’s possible and nothing matters, just because in a vague sense lots of explanations might be possible.
Probably a good decision tactically. You may have a feeling that if you attempt to offer another innocent explanation it may be shown to contradict some kind of other clear evidence, and you may be right.
(Also, again, it’s relevant that Hasan is already on camera abusing other dogs, and that his attempt at an innocent explanation is one of those explanations that can’t possibly be true. It is legitimately confusing to me why those things are not important to you. Parasocial relationships are a hell of a drug, I guess.)
Anyway I am done now. I was just curious if you had anything better to offer.
It’s not tactical, it’s just how guilt is generally determined. Speculative testimony (like “I think he did it for this reason”) is generally inadmissible in court. Speculation about motives isn’t evidence. Offering my own speculation about motives wouldn’t count as proof either, so it doesn’t make sense for me to do that.
Absolutely correct. If I see anyone doing that, I’ll be sure to yell at them for you.