Elon Musk
@elonmusk
RT
@DisgracedProp: People demanding "proof" of election fraud are not understanding how crime works. I worked at Manhattan DA for over 2 years, one in Homicide. We never had video proof of the crime. We almost never had DNA. These are things that occur on CSI on TV, not in real life. And we still convicted people all the time. What we had was testimony and circumstantial evidence. Travel times, bank records, cell phone data, gate access codes. Motive, capability, benefit, time and place. Never direct proof. Of course the defendant always denied the crime, but there was enough evidence to show that one had to have occurred nonetheless. If what we have in the LA Mayoral election is a statistical anomaly that is beyond reasonable explanation with anything besides fraud, that is enough to prove a crime. This has been true since the beginning of Western Civlization.
@DisgracedProp: People demanding "proof" of election fraud are not understanding how crime works. I worked at Manhattan DA for over 2 years, one in Homicide. We never had video proof of the crime. We almost never had DNA. These are things that occur on CSI on TV, not in real life. And we still convicted people all the time. What we had was testimony and circumstantial evidence. Travel times, bank records, cell phone data, gate access codes. Motive, capability, benefit, time and place. Never direct proof. Of course the defendant always denied the crime, but there was enough evidence to show that one had to have occurred nonetheless. If what we have in the LA Mayoral election is a statistical anomaly that is beyond reasonable explanation with anything besides fraud, that is enough to prove a crime. This has been true since the beginning of Western Civlization.
@DisgracedProp
People demanding "proof" of election fraud are not understanding how crime works. I worked at Manhattan DA for over 2 years, one in Homicide. We never had video proof of the crime. We almost never had DNA. These are things that occur on CSI on TV, not in real life. And we still convicted people all the time.
What we had was testimony and circumstantial evidence. Travel times, bank records, cell phone data, gate access codes. Motive, capability, benefit, time and place. Never direct proof. Of course the defendant always denied the crime, but there was enough evidence to show that one had to have occurred nonetheless.
If what we have in the LA Mayoral election is a statistical anomaly that is beyond reasonable explanation with anything besides fraud, that is enough to prove a crime. This has been true since the beginning of Western Civlization.