[QUOTE=Ohio;81086][QUOTE=zeek;81077]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
You don't like my explanation? What else is new.
Let me repeat.
The presumption of innocence is part of the American experience, reaching every part of our culture. It is needed now more than ever with this evil, crooked media we have. This is designed to protect the innocent from evil lies and false witnesses, as in Brett Kavanaugh's and Clarence Thomas's situations.
This presumption of innocence does NOT mean that someone cannot be found guilty in the court of public opinion. That will be determined by fair-minded individuals as evidence comes forward. In the case of that Lousy-Ford, she either lied or pled ignorance to every detail of the event for 36 years, but knew for sure that it was Kavanaugh. She had zero corroboration of any evidence whatsoever. It says a whole lot about your character when you are willing to believe such people.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is the judicial standard for conviction according to the various thresholds defined by law, i.e. "the burden of proof," e.g. "beyond a reasonable doubt, a preponderance of evidence," etc.
Apparently the media has robbed you of this little bit of common sense "wisdom." And you are almost 70 yo?
|
The Law in the OT was very clear, you could not convict someone based on one witness. In addition if someone is convicted of being a false witness they were supposed to be given the judgement that they were trying to put on someone else. Now the woman who accused Kavanaugh of working with others to gang rape her should be convicted of being a false witness.