Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is what I find scary on the internet these days; people who become judge, jury, and executioner (in their own minds) based upon accusations before any trial.
It often is the case that a person accused of something is guilty, but...there are cases where, despite the accusations and 'evidence', it turns out they are innocent. We had a case like this way back when I was growing up...an aboriginal guy was accused of murdering someone during a robbery. He was found guilty and sent to prison for over 10 years (maybe longer, I've forgotten now) before his case was finally retried and he was found innocent beyond any reasonable doubt (it turned out that, while he and his friend had intended on robbing the guy, his friend was the one wielding the knife and stabbed the victim to death. The point on this one is, not everyone accused is guilty of the charge. And yet these days, it is scary to see so many people who want someone put to death or thrown in jail for eternity because they have been accused. And if we didn't have a judicial system (which, obviously, has it's own failures in the system) many innocent people would suffer.
Due process seems to be nonexistent in many peoples' minds these days.
This is what I find scary on the internet these days; people who become judge, jury, and executioner (in their own minds) based upon accusations before any trial.
It often is the case that a person accused of something is guilty, but...there are cases where, despite the accusations and 'evidence', it turns out they are innocent. We had a case like this way back when I was growing up...an aboriginal guy was accused of murdering someone during a robbery. He was found guilty and sent to prison for over 10 years (maybe longer, I've forgotten now) before his case was finally retried and he was found innocent beyond any reasonable doubt (it turned out that, while he and his friend had intended on robbing the guy, his friend was the one wielding the knife and stabbed the victim to death. The point on this one is, not everyone accused is guilty of the charge. And yet these days, it is scary to see so many people who want someone put to death or thrown in jail for eternity because they have been accused. And if we didn't have a judicial system (which, obviously, has it's own failures in the system) many innocent people would suffer.
Due process seems to be nonexistent in many peoples' minds these days.
This is a weak example of "innocent." He was participating in a crime. This sounds like an excuse for wrongful incarceration. "Yeah, here's an example for you. The guy was innocent, even though he did it. Wink, wink. Law enforcement doesn't make mistakes."
Outrageous miscarriages of justice happen every day. Sometimes the accused person was nowhere near the crime scene, had nothing to do with what was going on, and ends up on death row anyway. Google, "Innocence Project." I give law enforcement credit for the good work they do too. There's a lot of it.
There is a difference between a court of law and the court of public opinion. In a court of law you are innocent until proven guilty. In the court of public opinion? You could very well be guilty until proven innocent.
A supreme court appointment is a job interview. Your employer (we the people) deserve to know everything about you. The good, the bad, the ugly, and the criminal.
There is a difference between a court of law and the court of public opinion. In a court of law you are innocent until proven guilty. In the court of public opinion? You could very well be guilty until proven innocent.
A supreme court appointment is a job interview. Your employer (we the people) deserve to know everything about you. The good, the bad, the ugly, and the criminal.
The job interview analogy works for me, sort of. But even in job interviews, few people care about stuff dug up from 30 years ago, especially allegations. Often there are qualifiers, "Offenses in the last 7 years," and so on. Granted, this position is much more important than that.
Let's face it. The political motivation is clear and obvious. That doesn't invalidate the accusations. But we were all taught in school, "Examine the source." It's one thing for a random stranger to say, "Mr. X beats his kid." It's another for his wife's best friend to say in the middle of a bitter divorce trial. People look at who is making an accusation, and why, as they should. I believe Christine Ford, roughly. I'll be skeptical of an overly-detailed recollection.
For the record, don't like Kavanaugh and wish he'd go away. Would be thrilled if he were not nominated. But it should be for the right reasons.
This is a weak example of "innocent." He was participating in a crime. This sounds like an excuse for wrongful incarceration. "Yeah, here's an example for you. The guy was innocent, even though he did it. Wink, wink. Law enforcement doesn't make mistakes."
Outrageous miscarriages of justice happen every day. Sometimes the accused person was nowhere near the crime scene, had nothing to do with what was going on, and ends up on death row anyway. Google, "Innocence Project." I give law enforcement credit for the good work they do too. There's a lot of it.
I never said he was innocent; he did not murder the victim, which is what he was jailed for, and thus was innocent of that crime, which is a far more serious sentencing than attempted robbery.
[quote=unwillingphoenician;53193646]The job interview analogy works for me, sort of. But even in job interviews, few poeple care about stuff dug up from 30 yeas ago, especially allegations. Often there are qualifiers, "Offenses in the last 7 years," and so on. Granted, this position is much more important than that.
I know a man that almost lost a job because of financial issues from 25 years ago. He told me that only reason they acquiesced was because he knew a "big wig" on the board who vouched for him. He was glad he never burned his bridges.
Pedophilia is the worst crime to be accused of, even worse than murder itself. The supporters who think Cody is innocent and was framed, are called names like "they must be pedos themselves!" and all other sorts of put-downs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
In the court of public opinion, we are free to make up our minds as information becomes available. But with the namecalling you are mentioning, it's not so much a matter of them thinking he's innocent or guilty as much as it is them just calling the other side of the political issue names.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog
You'll have to point out where I said that was the namecalling I was talking about. I'll give you a hint. It wasn't. The 3D gun guy is politically charged. If you agree with him or disagree with him, you'll be called names by the other side.
I think it's understandable where I'd get confused, considering the stream of conversation...
The job interview analogy works for me, sort of. But even in job interviews, few poeple care about stuff dug up from 30 yeas ago, especially allegations. Often there are qualifiers, "Offenses in the last 7 years," and so on. Granted, this position is much more important than that.
I know a man that almost lost a job because of financial issues from 25 years ago. He told me that only reason they acquiesced was because he knew a "big wig" on the board who vouched for him. He was glad he never burned his bridges.
Which is why I said, "few people." There are always exceptions. It's fair to say we should care here.
I'm referring to Cody Wilson, the 3-D gun advocate.
Yes, he was accused of committing a sex crime with a minor.
But he hasn't been convicted yet in court. Evidences have to be gathered. There have to be testimonies, and all facts have to be considered. He did not confess. Yes, the fact that he was in Taiwan and stayed there after finding out he was a wanted man doesn't look good for him. But again, every one is entitled to due process.
Pedophilia is the worst crime to be accused of, even worse than murder itself. The supporters who think Cody is innocent and was framed, are called names like "they must be pedos themselves!" and all other sorts of put-downs.
I'm not saying Cody or anyone like him who is accused are guilty. I'm not saying he's innocent either. But why jump to conclusion without getting all the facts? Why assume just because it's in the news making the person look bad, he or she is guilty before convicted?
There is the legal finding of guilt or no guilt. Then there is the public perception of guilt or no guilt. None of us can help feeling about something the way we feel, which is based on what we know of the evidence, filtered through our personal experiences.
I don't know much about the case to have an opinion. I'd probably form somewhat of an opinion, after hearing the evidence. Just because I have a brain and would know whether the evidence seems strong or not. But that is not the trial. I do try to keep an open mind. The news probably doesn't report all the evidence, and the investigation isn't even over. And we don't have a defense presented in the news.
As far as evidence being planted, people don't take stock in that much, because that is the old standby defense when the evidence is too strong to deny. It could be true, but often it's not. It usually doesn't work as a defense, because it's difficult to prove. And then you'd have to explain why. Why would anyone plant evidence of that? What would they get out of it? See the problem?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
