If you rely on affidavits we will lose. I've been on the receiving end of many fraudulent affidavits. I've watched judges scan through them and then completely dismiss them. It's smoke but judges prefer to make decisions based on fire.
It's still important to differentiate between hearsay evidence and first person evidence....or being told by someone that they saw some shenanigans is hearsay, actually seeing something happens makes it a first person account and is widely accepted by the judicial system whereas hearsay is not, there's chaff that needs to be picked out of the wheat.
The countless affidavits from the Nuremberg trials come to mind.
If affidavits are not evidence then does that mean that Democrats are Holocaust deniers?
*sworn. But yes.
Facts are racist stop it
If you rely on affidavits we will lose. I've been on the receiving end of many fraudulent affidavits. I've watched judges scan through them and then completely dismiss them. It's smoke but judges prefer to make decisions based on fire.
Sad but true dear.
In before suddenly the definition of Affidavit is changed on all dictionary websites.
You have no evidence = the news I follow, i.e., the only gatekeepers of information I accept, have not said you have evidence
It's still important to differentiate between hearsay evidence and first person evidence....or being told by someone that they saw some shenanigans is hearsay, actually seeing something happens makes it a first person account and is widely accepted by the judicial system whereas hearsay is not, there's chaff that needs to be picked out of the wheat.