But you’re making my claim for me — it’s not enough to say the venue has a reputation, you need to demonstrate that for every person who takes the stand.

Again, juries don’t vote on vibes, the phrase is “beyond reasonable doubt” so even putting some doubt into the minds of the jurors might be enough to allow the alibi.

Sure, but that’s a) consistent with how flimsy eyewitness testimony is even under the best of conditions, and b) not how cross examination works in the court room?

I think even if the jury was explicitly told of the reputation of the venue, that wouldn’t lead to a guilty verdict. It’s not enough to have a general reputation of giving false alibis, you need to disprove each one each time. Jury members aren’t allowed to vote guilty or not guilty based on vibes, or reputation, only on the admissible evidence of the case.

Sure, but if you’re on the stand it’s only ever your own word. The point of the bar is that if you say you were there, the bartender and other patrons will also say you were there, so then you’ve got maybe dozens of people going on the stand and verifying the alibi.

As long as eye-witness testimony has any weight at all, this idea holds up.