This comment reminds me of a 4chan post, where the poster talks about understanding the difference between anecdotes and statistics, and goes on to say that anyone who responds to a statistic with an anecdote they think disproves it isn’t very intelligent.

You don’t want to be dumber than a 4channer, do you?

Bernie was attending protests and picket lines, and even getting arrested, back in the 70s. He’s the real deal, and does what others merely talk about.

I’m not convinced that’s the case actually. We’re better off in some ways, definitely worse off in others.

Yapping on about the patriarchy, white privilege, male privilege etc is one example.

You’re right, but people doing good things in a broken world is something to celebrate.

Yeah, I think the phone is what sunk him.

It would absolutely be used as evidence in your favour by your defence though. It’s not conclusive, but it helps.

Which is part of the reason the burden of proof is on them.

Are you seriously suggesting a police force will not secure a murder suspect’s phone as part of their enquiries?

Or that, if they didn’t, this would work against them in court later?

Do you not understand the concept of a defence attorney? It’s not just the police that decide what is and isn’t evidence.