|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:18 pm
Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:13 pm
BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:17 pm
Solarn BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.
Oh ok, no worries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:50 pm
Solarn BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.No, you expressed yourself perfectly clearly. And I disagree with your views on this subject. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying here. And the trial is after the investigation because that is when all the evidence has been gathered by both sides (and even then, more evidence could come to light). Arrests are made based on much, much smaller amounts of evidence than convictions are. The job of a jury is to look at all that evidence and see if the prosecution has gathered enough of it to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If there is not enough evidence to prove that, then the defendant must be found not guilty. If this system was not in place, thousands of innocent people would be behind bars and thousands of criminals would be getting away with things by framing others. It seems like you don't understand how the judicial system actually works. Nothing is proven until the trial is over. The purpose of a trial is to prove the case. If the defendant is already thought to be guilty before the trial, there wouldn't be a reason to have a trial. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty is the right of every human being.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 12:10 pm
Eruravenne Solarn BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.No, you expressed yourself perfectly clearly. And I disagree with your views on this subject. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying here. And the trial is after the investigation because that is when all the evidence has been gathered by both sides (and even then, more evidence could come to light). Arrests are made based on much, much smaller amounts of evidence than convictions are. The job of a jury is to look at all that evidence and see if the prosecution has gathered enough of it to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If there is not enough evidence to prove that, then the defendant must be found not guilty. If this system was not in place, thousands of innocent people would be behind bars and thousands of criminals would be getting away with things by framing others. It seems like you don't understand how the judicial system actually works. Nothing is proven until the trial is over. The purpose of a trial is to prove the case. If the defendant is already thought to be guilty before the trial, there wouldn't be a reason to have a trial. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty is the right of every human being.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 2:18 pm
Solarn Eruravenne Solarn BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.No, you expressed yourself perfectly clearly. And I disagree with your views on this subject. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying here. And the trial is after the investigation because that is when all the evidence has been gathered by both sides (and even then, more evidence could come to light). Arrests are made based on much, much smaller amounts of evidence than convictions are. The job of a jury is to look at all that evidence and see if the prosecution has gathered enough of it to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If there is not enough evidence to prove that, then the defendant must be found not guilty. If this system was not in place, thousands of innocent people would be behind bars and thousands of criminals would be getting away with things by framing others. It seems like you don't understand how the judicial system actually works. Nothing is proven until the trial is over. The purpose of a trial is to prove the case. If the defendant is already thought to be guilty before the trial, there wouldn't be a reason to have a trial. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty is the right of every human being. Ok, fine... whatever...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:20 am
Eruravenne Solarn Eruravenne Solarn BlueRaven990 Solarn Oh yeah. Sorry. I always forget that you people live in America.
And I know, but I'm like most other people and can't help but wonder how he could be before a jury without his guilt having already been found out. I mean, usually an investigation precedes these things, so by the time the case gets to court, there's already evidence of who did it.
I'm a Brit...
And Eru, it seems that I didn't express myself clearly. I know that, but just like most people, I feel that to be in a court means that someone's guilt is already proven. I know it isn't so but it's a cultural thing. The court is there for after the investigation. I don't think that it's actually that way, but I still feel so.No, you expressed yourself perfectly clearly. And I disagree with your views on this subject. You don't seem to understand what I'm saying here. And the trial is after the investigation because that is when all the evidence has been gathered by both sides (and even then, more evidence could come to light). Arrests are made based on much, much smaller amounts of evidence than convictions are. The job of a jury is to look at all that evidence and see if the prosecution has gathered enough of it to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. If there is not enough evidence to prove that, then the defendant must be found not guilty. If this system was not in place, thousands of innocent people would be behind bars and thousands of criminals would be getting away with things by framing others. It seems like you don't understand how the judicial system actually works. Nothing is proven until the trial is over. The purpose of a trial is to prove the case. If the defendant is already thought to be guilty before the trial, there wouldn't be a reason to have a trial. To be presumed innocent until proven guilty is the right of every human being. Ok, fine... whatever...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
