Refer to the murder of George Marsh (1912) on pg 90, How would a defense lawyer today challenge the conviction based on the evidence presented in the case?

The lawyer would dispute that a button and a piece of cloth are not specific evidence to convict someone.

Explanation:

George Marsh was found dead near a car. he was shot and to find the person responsible, a search for evidence began. A button and a piece of fabric were found, which were used to convict the killer. The baton and fabric matched the suspect's coat, which was enough to convict him of the culprit.

However, this crime occurred in 1912, when fast fashion chains did not exist where several exactly the same clothes are manufactured, as today. In that case, if that were the judgment on George Marsh's assassination to happen today, the lawyer would contest the button and the piece of fabric as evidence, because many people can wear clothes that match the button and piece of fabric in question.

looks like the answer is     c     to me!