I didn't say he was guilty. That's not my place to decide. I said it looks like they have a smoking gun unless they can explain away a lot of suspicious behavior. Maybe they can.

I actually haven't drawn any conclusion, particularly on the person involved. This is basically standing on the sidelines and saying damn, they have a good case. It'll be impressive to see the defense.

You've drawn the conclusion and assumed I have. I'm merely remarking that the case is extraordinarily strong and the evidence, as circumstantial as it is, is compelling, unless you feel that the evidence is fabricated. And a lawyer can't rip all of what I read to shreds, though I understand what you're saying.

You said "I think they have him dead to rights". Unless you are not a native English speaker and you don't understand the words that you're typing, it means you think that the accused is guilty. If that's not what you meant then I suggest using different words.

Of course you think they have a good case. All you've heard is their side.

It's weird being the guy who has lobbied for discretion and waiting for the other side in these cases on Hacker News before, and then being told I don't understand the words I am typing. The evidence basically indicts him, outright. Full stop. I'm sorry, and I know it offends you, but I'm acknowledging that fact. He is pretty much red-handed, and the evidence basically amounts to "we found the defendant standing over the corpse while holding a bloody knife."

Maybe he has an explanation that we will find out (maybe he was performing surgery to save him!), but right now, the evidence doesn't look good. This isn't complicated whether English is my primary, secondary, tertiary, or quarternary language. I also have performed forensics investigations not unlike the deposition I've read, and at no point did I say "gosh, that's thin." That's my point. He was remarkably dumb in the alleged narrative, if it's all true. Given my experience with Google's investigative abilities, I don't doubt any of the evidence submitted.

I disagree with you, you are wrong, and I understand every inch of the words I am typing. It's perfectly reasonable to acknowledge that Google and Waymo have done their due diligence bringing a coherent and well-defended complaint here. Please do me a favor and don't assume that because I'm on the other side I'm deficient or inferior to you in some way. It's how I know there is literally zero fruit down the path of engaging you.