The document discusses two cases where different witness statements identify different people as the robber - in case 1 witness B identifies robber as B, and in case 2 witness A identifies robber as D. However, the document concludes that based on the contradictory statements, the robber cannot be uniquely identified and could be either B or D.
The document discusses two cases where different witness statements identify different people as the robber - in case 1 witness B identifies robber as B, and in case 2 witness A identifies robber as D. However, the document concludes that based on the contradictory statements, the robber cannot be uniquely identified and could be either B or D.
The document discusses two cases where different witness statements identify different people as the robber - in case 1 witness B identifies robber as B, and in case 2 witness A identifies robber as D. However, the document concludes that based on the contradictory statements, the robber cannot be uniquely identified and could be either B or D.