this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
-18 points (15.4% liked)

conservative

920 readers
1 users here now

A community to discuss conservative politics and views.

Rules:

  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Submission headline should match the article title (don't cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  5. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  6. No trolling.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Yall didn't like my earlier fluff, lets try an actual fluff article this time. I do realize its just rehashing more bullshit, but activity is good, right?

all 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

The forensic team that produced these results seems like less of an objective 3rd party and more of a laboratory that tries to use "science" to help their customers reach a certain conclusion. If you watch as much murder porn as I do (Dateline, etc) you'll know that it's not that hard to find experts that can come to a completely opposite conclusion from the prosecution.

That alone doesn't invalidate their assertions but you should know they're most definitely starting with massive fraud as the conclusion and working backwards to support that conclusion. For one, referring to missing paperwork, paperwork that most counties probably don't keep very long, as evidence of fraud.