This week’s readings I found some to be intriguing. While reading part 3 of ,Authur and George, by Julian Barnes, I enjoyed how they started the chapter off on day two of testimonies starting with Joseph Marku who was the gatekeeper. I found it interesting how they were trying so hard to accuse George for wounding one of the horses. They carry on talking about the hairs and bloodstains. The detail in the books and their techniques in the court throughout the book is what I find interesting to look more into. Understanding their thoughts as well as trying to find out what may happen next when. While reading through the Wilsons Report they go into details about the evidence for this trial. He broke it into two parts into explaining what they had going against Edalji. The first part of evidence was circumstantial evidence that was brought upon him by others, as well as the second part of evidence was a letter that was said to be written by Edalji. When they brought up the letter that was anonymous it made me wonder if in this time how they inspected that evidence. Did they have a way to differentiate people writing at the time? Or was it more on assumption and belief of how they feel about the case?