Quote:
Originally Posted by butterfly
I was arguing that the defense need not necessarily put forward any evidence because the burden of proof lies on the state. It isn't axiomatic that the mere existence of state evidence in the absence of any other evidence is sufficient for conviction.
It may be moot with respect to this particular alleged incident with Lucic, but in a general sense I don't think it is at all.
|
Go back and re-read your posts.