BritsKate
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2010
- Messages
- 6,234
- Reaction score
- 4,834
I'm not required to think about the defendant in a positive way? Nor have I called you out for refusing to see the defendant in any negative light. Both our opinions are afforded some leeway assuming we follow TOS and remain respectful.You have already made up your mind about him and not in a positive way.
I have yet to see the prosecution offer any evidence that he did what he is accused with doing.
I noticed in another post you say the prosecutor "intimated" that the earlier bangs were the bat. I never saw him intimate or state any such thing. I assume you used the word "intimate" because the prosecutor didn't state it outright. If you could direct me to where the prosecutor places the earlier bangs as bat strikes, I would be interested to see it.
I already posted a link in the post you're referring to. I have neither the time nor inclination to post 'corroborating' links when I've already provided one in respect to sequence. You can accept the link provided or not - your call entirely. To save you from having to search it out, here it is again: http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2014/03/13/oscar-trial-expert-can-t-fix-sequence-of-shots-bashing
Awesome! I had no idea you were South African and had close relatives in the South African military.I have close relatives in the military as well.
And, guess what they are fighting for? Our way of life.
Which includes, among other things, innocent until proven guilty.
Unless I'm confusing your post and you believe America's military fights for South Africans constitutional rights? I'm pretty sure they're separate democracies though both ensure the constitutional right to a fair trial which includes the presumption of innocence. The presumption of innocence, it could and has been argued, is mainly for the fact finders. We are neither jury nor judge, ergo, the presumption of innocence need not necessarily apply and indulging such presumption - despite any and all evidence to the contrary - becomes a personal moral issue rather than either a legal or constitutional one, in either country. A very good op-ed:
The presumption of innocence is not a mandate that is imposed on all social discourse. It is not logical to assert, as a statement of fact, that a person is innocent until he/she has been proven to be guilty because it is possible for an innocent person to be convicted of a crime and it is possible for a guilty person to be acquitted of a crime.
A person should not be considered guilty in the court of public opinion just because he/she has been accused of, or indicted for, a crime, but it is permissible for people to form opinions based on the information that is available to the public.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/FALSE-ASSUMPTIONS-ABOUT-TH-by-Blaine-Kinsey-090112-330.htmlI am sure that this article will not make me popular with attorneys, who often request that everyone should indulge a presumption of innocence on behalf of their clients, but the demand for a presumption of innocence is an artifice outside of criminal court.
Of course, if you'd like to google there are several more academic, less opinionated, references to the debate on the presumption of innocence - specifically how it relates to the public - as well.