Quote:
Originally Posted by Benched
In our system, innocent until proven guilty.
So if the evidence of the case is not admissible due to tampering, then the case comes down to he said, she said, which = no charges.
I think that helps the defendant more, so in this case Kane.
|
But if the accuser did not like the results, then she could want to make the evidence inadmissable. Of course, Kane would know this and would therefore also know that by destroying the evidence the accuser looks guilty. Which of course, the accuser would know, which is why they would want to destroy the evidence... Which of course....