Gonna call the victim’s evidence weak and then posit that this will exonerate him?

Nope, I’m not. I dunno anything about this case, just that you were asking a question that was answered in the next sentence, which is usually a sign of someone acting in bad faith.

To quote the sentences immediately after your quote:

Warrants to get the cell phone pings of his location, the instagram data that was supposedly deleted can still be retrieved. The emails to the Therapist.

When it came to GTA V, I wanted it. Oh, did I want it. Didn’t buy it for several years, then a friend gave me an Xbox 360 copy because he didn’t like it, then another several years later, having never finished the game, I ended up getting a PC copy for less than $10.

$10 feels like too much to give to Rockstar at this point.

Books aren’t games, either, but you brought them up. Why are different forms of media valid when they support your argument but not when they don’t?