Quote:
Originally Posted by jef612
It is not flawed evidence at all.
The crown firearms expert had argued that the hangfire would have lasted at most 2-3 seconds, and the defence produced two witnesses to counter that argument with their own testimony regarding their experience with hangfires that lasted significantly longer than 3 seconds.
Maybe you don't like it - but that is exactly how evidence and counter evidence works. Don't tell the world that hang fires last "up to three seconds" and then bitch when people come forward and counter your theory with first hand experience to the contrary.
|
I didn’t like the crown’s expert testimony either. When I heard that I was thinking the CFSC insistence you wait 60 secs after a hangfire would be great to introduce to evidence.
I don’t see why the evidence of lay people couldn’t be presented. The expert testimony presented an unclear picture at best I felt. I felt he was leading with his chin, and counter evidence was easy to provide. You don't have to take "expert" testimony as fact, as it often isn't.