[plank_time]

I mean, how can we know that any evidence isn’t manufactured?

Besides, the article definitely presents its side of the story, but the fact it left out a huge detail that the person admitted to committing the crime calls into question the article itself. What other things did it conveniently leave out?

[wilsynet]

Did he admit to committing the crime? Or did he just say “uh huh”?

But to answer the question, well how do we know any evidence isn’t manufactured? You know, I agree with your sentiment here.

But I would also say that the prosecution here has been caught lying, red handed, multiple times. For this case and for the evidence presented here, it should be examined and reaxamined.