After discarding the evidence that is too inherently weak or vague for any sensible person to rely on it, prosecution evidence is such that a reasonable jury or court martial board properly directed could never reach the high standard of proof required to be sure of the guilt of any defendant.

When a person is truly bright, s/he travels always light because a sensible solely knows that it’s only way right to make the life’s journey pleasurable. Otherwise, obviously miserable for then it’s like boarding on a train, bus or plane by carrying along an entourage and/or too much luggage to crowd the place that merely causes discomfort to others and to own an excruciating pain.

My daughter's autograph played no part in the judgment as I was not on the disciplinary panel that heard the case.

In relation to all defendants . . . the prosecution evidence taken at its highest is such that a reasonable jury or court martial board properly directed could never reach the high standard of proof required to be sure of the guilt of any defendant.

Identification testimony is one of the more unreliable pieces of evidence for the prosecution.

Imagine if there is evidence critical to a criminal prosecution and the defendant challenges the evidence because it is constitutionally suspect. It could jeopardize any criminal case.