The narrator of the story makes this abundantly clear in the exposition of the story. It seems that all of the elements needed to prove guilt in the courtroom setting is evident. The largest and seemingly most convincing spate of evidence comes from eyewitness testimony. Mrs. Salmon "saw Adams on the steps of Mrs. Parker's house." Henry MacDougall "nearly ran Adams down at the corner of Northwood Street." Old Mr. Wheeler "was wakened by a noise- like a chair falling- through the thin- as- paper villa wall, and got up and looked out of the window" and saw Adams' "bulging eyes." The narrator suggests that this lineup of witnesses whose stories converge end up really damaging the chances of Adams, whichever Adams it might be as will be known later, to get out of this without being found guilty. The lineup of witnesses seems to be the most prevalent and seemingly the most convincing element of the evidential burden. It was through these separate testimonies that "this murder was all but found with the body." It is in this where there is a clear cut case for finding the accused Adams guilty.
i think the case was declared clear-cut because there were too many witnesses to the murder who claimed that they had seen adams with the murder weapon. so, they thought that there was practially nothing to prove in court.
this is from case for the defence by graham greene. please answer this question in brief.