Circumstantial Evidence

Increasingly, in the under educated political environment pervasive in NZ, circumstantial evidence is clearly enough to constitute good ‘evidence’.  (Sits somewhere above Rumours but below actual evidence on the crap-o-meter)

In fairness the modern resident in this cuntree has a defence with regards to their capacity to be hoodwinked and shylocked by something resembling ‘evidence’ .  

We have not had a great track record as in the past circumstantial evidence has indeed been enough to convict Scott Watson and Peter Ellis (we are not saying they were innocent), and in the greatest case, even knowingly planted circumstantial evidence was enough to convict Arthur Allen Thomas.    

Daily we are falling for the line “…if you get Covid and have had the  vaccine you will have a lesser does of Covid.”  Again could be true, might not be, but basically an untestable hypothesis with all publications acknowledging their assertion is based on,  you guessed it,  circumstantial evidence.

So why raise this now.  Well we seem to have reached a disgraceful new editorial low in our brief history here at Planet-b.

Stuff are copying of us.  

Yep you heard it here.  Over the last few weeks there have been 7 examples where the very next day after we published an item, Stuff published something similar.  Two in the last three days with the content very very close.  

Circumstantial evidence? mmmmmmm

Now, my fellow authors argue that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but as we have gone to great lengths to pan the crap Stuff publish, we clearly need to lower our standards and be far more offense.  

Sorry guys we are working on it for you.

Share this post

No Comment.