I don't know how to be more clear with you: in America, people plea guilty to crimes they didn't commit because of the unfairness of the court system. People accept deals under threat of having their lives ruined and verdicts and sentences are unpredictable.
I will not accept what happens in a courtroom as proof.
And that is not even the crux of the argument. It is a logical fallacy that a person's purported immorality makes something they say incorrect.
So you're sure he didn't falsely represent medical tests but you have no idea why he confessed to doing it. Just a voice in your head saying "they made him do it".
It is a logical fallacy that a person's purported immorality makes something they say incorrect.
If they lied professionally once for profit it lowers the value of their professional opinion. If you're going to bring an expert to testify for you your opponent shouldn't be able to say "Look here, he's lied in these circumstances before."
So you're sure he didn't falsely represent medical tests...
No, of course I am not sure. I just don't accept only a court's determination that it is true. You are misrepresenting what I wrote. Anyone is free to take what happened in court at face value.
If they lied professionally once for profit...
Certainly. That is why we don't just believe what people say and instead look at the evidence ourselves. A liar saying something does not make it false. Otherwise, we could simply pay disreputable sources to... hey, wait a minute.
I don't know how to be more clear with you: in America, people plea guilty to crimes they didn't commit because of the unfairness of the court system. People accept deals under threat of having their lives ruined and verdicts and sentences are unpredictable.
I will not accept what happens in a courtroom as proof.
And that is not even the crux of the argument. It is a logical fallacy that a person's purported immorality makes something they say incorrect.
So you're sure he didn't falsely represent medical tests but you have no idea why he confessed to doing it. Just a voice in your head saying "they made him do it".
If they lied professionally once for profit it lowers the value of their professional opinion. If you're going to bring an expert to testify for you your opponent shouldn't be able to say "Look here, he's lied in these circumstances before."
No, of course I am not sure. I just don't accept only a court's determination that it is true. You are misrepresenting what I wrote. Anyone is free to take what happened in court at face value.
Certainly. That is why we don't just believe what people say and instead look at the evidence ourselves. A liar saying something does not make it false. Otherwise, we could simply pay disreputable sources to... hey, wait a minute.