Quote:
Originally Posted by CMANN
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?
|
Yes, the defense does not have to prove anything. Not sure why you put words in my mouth about double jeopardy, or misquoted the Fifth Amendment. At any rate, for the record, the double-jeopardy clause states, "nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...".