but is not in reality different from the reasoning of a judge, who supposes, that the credit of two witnesses, maintaining a crime against any one, is destroyed by the testimony of two others, who affirm him to have been two hundred leagues distant, at the same instant when the crime is said to have been committed.
Argumentu honek xotil eta sofistikatuegia irudi dezake, baina egiatan ez du alderik epaile baten arrazoiketarekin, suposatutzat ematen duenean deseuztaturik geratzen dela norbaiten krimena baieztatzen duen bi lekukoren sinesgarritasuna, beste bi lekukoren testigantza datorkienean kontra, berrehun lekoatara zegoela esanez hura, krimena egin omen zuela dioten une berean.