In 1980 the prosecution used teeth-mark evidence to convict Ted Bundy for 3 murders he committed in Florida. This jury felt with this and all the other evidence that Bundy was the killer. He was not the first to have his teeth come back and 'bite him in the butt'. At the time of Bundy's trial the teeth-mark defense had been used in court in at least a dozen trials.
Although the method has it's critics, as forensics have improved and better and more exact imaging machines are used for crime detection, it is certainly gaining more respect, and when paired with other evidence it can make a much stronger case.
A:We have no reliable evidence that Saint Mark ever performed any miracles.
It is not infallable, but it is considered reliable enough to be use as evidence.
ill founded
Basing historical accounts on reliable evidence
When a source for evidence is not convincing or reliable, it should be considered unreliable or questionable. It is important to verify information from credible sources to ensure accuracy and authenticity.
There are no known reliable evidence regarding the fathers of apostles.
You cannot. There is no reliable and definitive evidence that ghosts exist.
cb
their genes
Evidence and witnesses are only as good as the lawyers questioning them or presenting evidence. Both can be reliable or found unreliable.
Hi, data provides evidence to back up your claim. Without evidence, your claim is not reliable.
get some plovers (birds that clean teeth) otherwise... not a reliable place to ask if you are doing it yourself