Excuse me but I understand it very well. The State bloody well better be able to PROVE its case against me or I walk. And that's the way it absolutely, positively should be. No ifs, ands or buts. But for whatever reason you don't seem to wholly embrace the principal.
What the hell? That's also the way it's defined under the law. Why are you ignoring this key detail? To me that's an all-important detail since it's there for my protection.
So bloody what? Unbelievable how you still insist on missing the point. I don't CARE if whoever/whatever did something and is not convicted. That's the price I'm willing to pay to continue living in a free society where we can't be cavalierly prosecuted and jailed by the State.
You say that you're a lawyer yet you've not heard of Blackstone's Formulation? I don't agree with Blackstone's ratio though. Rather than 10:1 it should be 100,000:1.
Yeah, well I have real problems with those civil juries. Is that how you earn your living or something? Is that why you're so intent on eroding the protections we all enjoy under our system of jurisprudence? Are you simply a Deep State fascist?
Just an accident of geography then. If you don't unequivocally embrace the principle that a man IS innocent until and unless proven guilty in an objective court of law, you should be disbarred (if you're indeed a lawyer) wherever you practice.
02-09-2025, 10:06 PM
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
