Pan Ohco wrote:

>>I don't know if he's innocent or guilty, but from what we've seen, I don't
>>think there's enough to conclude it's him yet.
>
> Any positive statement by the investigators will be used , by the
> defense attorney, as a tainting of a possible jury. .
>
> All the other "stuff" pointing to Smith is further evidence of the
> crime.
>
> The person in the video tape has been identified as Smith by people
> who know him. Going by a tattoo and the general appearance of the
> person on the videotape. The car (in question) on the tape has been
> identified by it's owner, who loaned it to Smith.
>
> I think that there is sufficient evidence to indite.

It's "indict". And, yes, there's enough there to convince a grand jury that
he's the likely perpetrator. But, that's a far cry from *proving* he's the
murderer. There's a high bar for proving such, and that's in place to help
protect innocent people from being convicted of such crimes.

--
Darryl L. Pierce >
Visit the Infobahn Offramp - <http://mypage.org/mcpierce>
"What do you care what other people think, Mr. Feynman?"