Good luck intepreting everything exactly as it’s written on the internet and assuming there is a perfect correspondence between thought and text on a multi-cultural/national board which has adopted english for the simple sake of convenience. You can do it.
Ah yes, the word 'evidence' indeed is very close to conviction. Makes perfect sense to read it like that.
Evidence is a pretty strong word, which is quite known and is hard to mix up with 'conviction'. These kind of 'cheating allegations' discussions usually end up with a call for evidence, trying to show that one cannot provide proof of foul play. My point was that last year with Ferrari nobody could provide proof either and actually nobody still can, because this proof is not available to anyone outside Ferrari / the FIA, but there are enough indications and circumstantial elements which lead to a clear conclusion.
Meaning that requesting evidence, or claiming that the lack thereof 'proofs' there is no foul play, is a bogus strategy in these kind of discussions.