Quote:
Originally Posted by Pturner
Hi CMANN,
The problem with Hollywood shortcuts is that they are misleading. It would be physically impossible for a defendant to actually be innocent until proven guilty, inasmuch as the alleged crime takes place before the trial.
The legal standard is that the accused is "presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law".
Innocence is a legal presumption in court, not a statement of the facts of the case. Indeed, the very reason our legal system has no mechanism for a verdict of innocent is because the presumption standard relieves the defense of any burden to prove a defendant innocent.
Yes, I suppose anyone can twist it anyway that makes them feel better, but she was not found to be innocent.
|
You are aware I hope, that the defendant has no burden to prove anything.
Proving ones innocents is to prove that a thing did not happen. We all know that one cannot prove a negative. Thus the presumption of innocents
UNTIL proven guilty.
The Constitution says in the Fifth Amendment, "no one may be placed in double jeopardy for crime for which he has already been tried and found innocent." By your standard you would be telling us that since this person was found not guilty because the government could not prove the case then she should be tried again.
I'm sorry, the child died. Very sorry. I'm very sorry if Casey got away with something. I am not, however sorry that our system of justice worked the way it was supposed to. There are other more efficient systems of law. Would you rather that we had one of those?