Originally Posted by Jason

not saying always but in certain places crimes are are more likely to committed by certain people.

for example lets make up a fake city called "Coke bottle"
if we look at crime stats for "Coke bottle" and they say:

80% of crime green people
20% of crime orange people

if a crime is committed and a green person and orange person are suspects it isnt unfair to assume that a green person committed the crime.. its just probability

you shouldnt condemn someone on the assumption.. but its not UNFAIR to assume that they might be responsible since thats the way it usually is

so its not unfair to assume under statistical evidence but its unfair to assume under circumstantial evidence? you're not making sense to me

Originally Posted by Jason

not saying always but in certain places crimes are are more likely to committed by certain people.

for example lets make up a fake city called "Coke bottle"
if we look at crime stats for "Coke bottle" and they say:

80% of crime green people
20% of crime orange people

if a crime is committed and a green person and orange person are suspects it isnt unfair to assume that a green person committed the crime.. its just probability

you shouldnt condemn someone on the assumption.. but its not UNFAIR to assume that they might be responsible since thats the way it usually is

so its not unfair to assume under statistical evidence but its unfair to assume under circumstantial evidence? you're not making sense to me