There is no claim or proof from the Pray Codex that the illustration is exactly that of the Shroud of Turin. During the Middle Ages many paintings, illustrations, and carvings were made of the crucifixion, burial and resurrection of Christ. The illustration in the Pray Codex of Christ’s burial is similar to the image derived from the shroud. That one or more of such paintings or illustrations are similar to the image seen in the Shroud of Turin is not evidence that the Shroud of Turin is the actual shroud of Christ.
There are different legal levels of evidence, including preponderance, reasonable suspicion, clear and convincing, and beyond a reasonable doubt. There are also scientific levels of evidence, as well as Bayesian statistics used to determine a probability from prior knowledge updated with information from new and confirmed data.
Those with the burden of proof regarding the shroud’s authenticity should state the confidence level of the evidence they present.
You’re pretty miserly in your concession on the Pray Codex. C’mon now: the holes that exactly match burn holes on the shroud, the herringbone pattern of the cloth, Jesus nude when he was absolutely never portrayed in that way in art, hands over the privates, missing thumbs. It is literally unlike any other artistic representation of Christ down from the cross. I’ll propose the evidence that the codex depicts the shroud is true by clear and convincing evidence, I.e., “sufficiently strong to command the assent of every reasonable mind.” As I said before, my point is that the notion, repeated by another poster, that the shroud appeared out of nowhere in 1354 is simply false. Acknowledgement of its existence as depicted in the codex just before year 1200 also smokes the carbon-14 findings, since that’s well before the oldest date claimed in those findings
Me, I’ve read, I think, every major work on the shroud in English. I’m convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. As to others, I think an open-minded view of the entirety of the evidence is close to clear and convincing. At the very least, I could convince a jury in my sleep that the authenticity is supported by the preponderance of the evidence