re: #95 Targetpractice

The recurring issue with all these affidavits being offered as “evidence” is that most of them contain little to nothing that could be actionable. “I think” or “I believe” or “I suspect” is of such little evidentiary value that no prosecutor would waste time dragging any of these fuckwits before a court just to prove a perjury charge. It’s the legal equiv of stuffing a bunch of blank pages into a folder, then waving it around at a presser as “evidence” in order to con the rubes into believing you’re not simply full of shit.

These affidavits are basically being presented as expert testimony. The problem with that is that an expert needs to establish credentials with the court that prove he or she is an actual expert in the thing they are placing themselves under oath to testify to. Watkins has zero expertise that is relevant to the court, so his “affidavit” isn’t even worth the electrons it was filed on.