Or are negatives required for evidence?
132040
Many police agencies now use digital cameras to document evidence, so digital images are admissible.  But, due to the nature of digital images and the ability to alter them, there are pretty strict guidelines regarding the handling of this evidence prior to it's use in court.  \n\nThe police have evidence control procedures in place to protect the digital images (along with all other evidence).  This makes it more likely that it will be admissible as evidence in court.  \n\nIf you are talking about a digital image that a private party took months before trial and was not secured in a manner to ensure it remained unmodified, then you may have a problem.  It may still be admissible, but it faces a far greater chance of being excluded.\n\nI'd talk to a lawyer about it if it's serious.
340710
In essence, the rule says that any evidence obtained in violation of constitutional rights cannot be admitted as evidence in the trial, unless one of several exemptions apply. The main controversy in this area is that guilty people can get off when there is no other evidence to convict. However, I think it is well worth letting a few guilty people go free to protect the rights granted in the constitution. If the rule did not exist, there would be little reason for the cops to follow the constitution, since their illegal evidence would still get the job done.
520823
witness statements? not sure i really get the question
451244
Not in the slightest...\n\nFor example, the government has failed to pass legislation they were working on last year to remove the 'proof of rape' requirements. If you are unaware of what I am referring to: the current law is that a woman must produce 3 MALE witnesses in order to prove she was raped.\n\nInsane and absolutely ludicrous.
140029
it is impossible to prove a negative.  One cannot prove the non-existance of god just as they could not prove the non-existance of WMD's in Iraq.  The lack of evidence against something in both cases is not evidence of it's existance.
505968
Good...\nMy proof....look into the eyes of a newborn.....
335304
Letter C is the answer. Neither-nor for negative and either-or for positive
653182
It's not a fair question. Say I was to tell you that I have a 'purple horned snorkstack' in my backyard.\nWould you believe me? No, of course not, only the terminally stupid would believe such an outlandish thing without proof.\nSame thing here.\nWe do not and will not believe in a magic sky-pixie until we have proof. Or at least some sort of credible evidence.\nIt is up to YOU to provide the proof. Not the other way around.\nThat is elementary logic.
482332
You want the prob that at least one of the five is positive.  \n\n"at least one" problems are nearly always best done by finding \nprob(none) and then subtracting from 1.\n\nWhat's the prob that a blood sample tests negative?  1 - 0.015\nRaise this to the fifth power to find prob that all five test negative.\n\nSubtract from 1 to get prob of at least one positive.
191860
Isn't the burden of evidence on those who claim it is real?
554244
The answer is:\n\ne) You have no supporting evidence for any of the above conclusions.
178332
Yes, but try to get some proof first.
242381
I've seen some excellent free professional advice on here, and some outrageously wrong answers.  One should have the sense to get confirmations for serious matters. \n\nI don't think Answers needs a disclaimer.
405358
there is no evidence or confirmation
202501
Physical proof?  There is none.  I guess you win.
328697
As you have to write a paper proving that mediums are real you need to state the evidence that backs up your claim, while disproving the evidence that disagrees with it.
302173
not C or B, so it come to A, or D, a pvalue between 0.01-0.05 is generally considered strong evidence for alternetive hupothothes and against null hypotheses, A says same thing as choice C so D is the right anwer