pull down to refresh

Distrust of statistical evidence is directed primarily against statistical proof of individual, specific events. Whenever some measurement of a large universe is at issue, such as the share of a market or the proportion of people holding a certain view, statistical evidence is clearly the best, if not the only, evidence obtainable. It is in such contexts that statistical evidence is playing a growing role in litigation.
That should map onto this case, but it seems like the primary evidence the prosecution is using (at least based on the podcasts I've listened to in the case.