he said he didn't suspect anything but he gave the reasoning, why it was suspicious

2. How did Mr. Jones see the person with the box in the darkness without light

   1. With a clear path with a light source you can see people clearly

   2. Without a light source no one can see a person with an object

Evidence:

1. How would he be able to tell that the person was holding a wooden box if it was dark outside?

2. If the person got closer to the wall, the shadow would've gotten smaller not bigger.

1. Mr. Jones said he was the person before he turned the headlights

1. It's not possible to see someone in the dark without any light source

He said he did not do or suspect anything but his reasons were off and he said he saw someone with a decorated wooden box which is really detailed for seeing someone in the dark before he turned on his car lights.

Evidence

1. Mr. Jones said he saw a person before turning his car lights

   
   

2. People's shadows are getting larger and larger

Reasoning

1. You can see people without light

2. Shadows can only get larger if you are closer to the light source

Evidence

1. Mr. Jones claimed that the shadow got bigger as the person disappeared, though the shadow would've gotten smaller as the person disappeared.

2. Mr. Jones claimed that it was completely dark outside and with no source of light at the time how could have he seen the jewelry box himself?

   Follow up question: He described everything in such detail including that is was decorated, and for that matter how could he have told that it

   was wooden without having the light to look at the texture to actually see if it was wooden.

   
   

   So in conclusion how could have Mr. Jones made of anything in the dark let alone describing the jewelry box in full detail, and the science was off.

   Which is why Mr. Jones in guilty.