cvalue13
·If there was a plan in place for scarcity is more about intent, and unless you are in the heads of the people making those decisions, I think it's tough to say if that really the case or not.
Intent? While shows like Perry Mason taught the public incorrectly that “circumstantial evidence” is a dirty word in court, it turns out in truth to be the opposite: circumstantial evidence is the bulk of any evidence at every trial, and is far more reliable than most direct evidence, especially eyewitness testimony, much less testimony of the defendant.
If one need be “in another’s head” to discuss and deduce intent, it wouldn’t more than just OF that would be devoid of content.
I think it’s patently obvious and uninteresting that current production can’t keep up with demand. From that observation, though, does not derive the conclusion that Swatch ever had the *intent* for production to meet demand.
I’ll be as interested as anyone to hear RJ’s interview with the defendant! 😁