Replies

And, yes, the owners are liars and, as I previously posted, you are taking their lies at face value. That is not OBJECTIVE evidence nor even very good evidence.

You ignore the evidence presented but provide nothing to back up your point except the mantra, "the owners are liars".

No one was an eyewitness to the murder. There are no videotapes. There is no DNA evidence. All of the circumstantial evidence points to the defendant as the guilty party: Motive, Opportunity, Means.

BUT, the defendant says he did not do it. Release him, right? After all the defendant knows what he did or did not do better than we do and his statement must be the best evidence. Right? What reason would he have to lie? Right?

Whether or not the owners make money or lose money and how much is relevant only because they have brought up the issue. If they raise the issue, they have the burden of proof. Their self-serving statements are NOT the best evidence. Their books, audited independently, are the best proof. We will not see those books in this lifetime, much less independent audits of same for reasons obvious to anyone with common sense.

I guess I am not going to convince you and you surely are not going to convince me by repeating the unaudited lies of the owners. Do you think the owners shoul;d submit their books to an independent audit or should we just take their word for it under the circumstances?