0410

The simplest argument is that the purchase of pseudoephedrine and lithium batteries in large quantities tends to show that Robinson was engaged in the manufacture and distribution of meth because those are its chief ingredients. Common sense says it is unusual for someone to have large quantities of these items unless they are making meth.

Questions?  Email tanford@indiana.edu and include the reference 0410.

Now a slightly harder question:  Suppose the prosecutor’s first item of evidence was version A --  a surveillance video from CVS showing him purchasing two packs of pseudoephedrine. The defense objects that it is irrelevant because the purchase of a small quantity of decongestant is common, so the evidence proves nothing.

How can the prosecutor respond? When you think you know the answer, click here.