The title sounds funny, but I just have to listen to evolution stories, to make the connection.
We should approach all evidence with some care, don't you think?
Have you read about the
Central Park Five?
So sad, isn't it? Did you hear the judge's alleged response after the supposed perpetrator confessed?
Matias Reyes: The Truth About the Real Attacker in the Central Park Five Case
To this day, the supervising prosecutor of the Central Park Five case, Linda Fairstein, maintains that the interrogation and trial methods used under her watch in the Central Park Jogger case were fair and lawful. And despite all evidence pointing to the contrary, she stands by her conviction that Antron, Kevin, Yusef, Raymond, and Korey participated in the 1989 attack: "I think Reyes ran with that pack of kids," Linda told The New Yorker in 2002.
It's so sad, that there are people so strong-headed, that they would accuse someone of being guilty with little or no evidence, or just based on their perception... no matter how wrong they may be, or regardless of the probability they may be wrong - especially when the evidence is not sufficient.
That's some arrogance.
So, I think we do need to take a close look at the evidence, and consider if we really have enough, but at the same time, be open to evidence that may not be to our liking, or preference.
Sometimes we may not realize that we are biased, so look at that too.
For all we know, Ms / Mrs Fairstein, may have been blinded by prejudice. Who knows.
...not to mention, blinded by pride.