What would you like to see...video tape of the meeting? Digital pics?
Are you a lawyer?
Any lawyers out there...is a notation in an appointment book good enough evidence for an indictment/conviction?
I'm no lawyer, but I watch them on TV! I wouldn't ask if it were enough to convict, because one circumstantial item would not be a preponderance of evidence. It might be enough to obtain a sarch warrant, though.
Just for the record, that shouldn't matter. This is not a court of law nor are we discussing jurisprudence. The standard of evidence for drawing conclusions, should be lower than "innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt".
I can't answer the indictment question, as I have little criminal experience, but as far as conviction, the notation might be hearsay, and thus inadmissible. It depends on who allegedly made the notation and perhaps several other things. If it gets entered, it can be weight with all the other evidence.
But we aren't really talking about a court of law that's based on justice and protecting the rights of innocents. We are talking about war where there is no specific burden of proof. What coroboration is there for the event in question? Is there another, reasonable, explanation for the existence of that evidence outside complicity? How likely is that explanation compared to the complicit one? Questions like these determine the value of intelligence.