So Atheists, with No or lack of evidence, Does the Law court ruled that the Criminal does not exists?

None of that makes sense. Anyone can make bread, and thus prove a baker exists. Anyone can make a garden and prove a gardener exists. Anyone can paint, etc....all terrible analogies.

Your argument is that because some things have a creator, everything must. Not logically true.

No, dolt. A lack of evidence in the case has no bearing on if a criminal exists. Obviously, if there is a crime committed, then a criminal exists. If there is no evidence against the person accused, then he either isn't the criminal who perpetrated the crime or you haven't found enough evidence and shouldn't take the case to court until you DO have enough evidence.

I laugh at the sheer hypocrisy that you have just conveyed in that statement.

"Only the Crime does? :D"

-Yet you believe God exist, without a start.

By saying God has always existent doesn't make you exempt from the logic that you just implied should be so obvious, simply because you are admitting that something can exist without being created.

That is what we call a shutdown argument.

atheist are pissed off people. 24/7. well not all but most. They'd do anything to convince themselves theres no God in order to live a life of sin without the remorse. You know how easy it is to have a supernatural walk with God? its so easy anyone can do it if they spend time with God. The fact that they don't do that just shows no matter how much supernatural and scientific evidence you have they would close their ears reject it out of ignorance.

The criminal is real, the baker and the bread are both provable. God is a myth to pacify the suckers.