I am sorry but we can't answer because we don't know the case you are asking about.
i don't know about that question.
yes it can prove ....
If it is a living organism it must reproduce itself sexually or asexually. Reproduction of the organism ( not viral hijacking of the reproductive mechanisms ) is one part of the definition of living things.
To begin with, a theory can not prove or disprove anything until it is proven itself.
An experiment can prove they are wrong or right ...:)
it does and it doesnt exist can prove and cant not prove so there you have it
A criminal case is harder to prove, as the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." A civil case only has to be by a "preponderance of the evidence" which is anything over half.
reflexive property of congruence
Evidence can prove, or disprove, the case against you.
To prove whether a number is composite, factor it. A number having any factor besides 1 and itself is composite.
it contains carbon
If the attorney can prove the officer's intent to violate your rights, or a statute, your case is likely to raise concerns: if nothing else. If the attorney cannot prove that the officer knowingly and intentionally violated a statute, you probably do not have a case. That being said, you can never be "positive" of anything in the justice system.
to prove discrimination
They moved on to a new case.
No! Correlation by itself is not sufficient to infer or prove causation.
No. You mean "a case in point" A case in point is an example that helps to prove your argument eg "The weather is unpredictable, last week's hurricanes were a case in point."
Yes, it does.
The defense do not have to prove anything, if the prosecution fail to prove guilt, then the defendant is not guilty (in an ideal world). It may be the case thaat a jury may find guilt when a charge has not really been adequately proved to be true, but in this case the judge must direct them to find "not guilty" through lack of evidence.