Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls
You need proof the defendant is talking about themselves. It doesn't matter if you can logically deduce that they were, you need evidence. It's a double-edged sword. This kind of **** is how guilty people get away with stuff all the time.
People use code words in text messages for a reason.
|
I think using an acronym whose only purpose is to refer yourself is as much evidence as anyone would need to prove that you were, in fact, referring to yourself. You don't need to logically deduce anything, cause there's no other thing it could mean (deduction requires that there be at least one option to
deduct). This sounds like one of those "If you ask a cop if he's a cop then he has to answer", kinds of BS.