Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-02-2012, 12:52 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
To believe that a person should be presumed guilty is to misunderstand the concept of "burden of proof". Unless a law includes an action that must be done, it is logically to be assumed by default that a person has not done an action that would result in a broken law.

I don't think that anyone sat down and said "should we assume guilt or innocence in court?", because it just doesn't make sense to assume guilt. The fear factor is what drives assumptions of guilt, and reactions based on fear are generally irrational (the Salem Witch trials, anyone?).

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 12:58 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
The only time someone should be presumed guilty is when it comes to bail. If they arrest someone that had 10 dead bodies in his fridge, he shouldn't get bail. It is actually in the law that you don't get bail if your a danger to the public. In that sense, I guess there needs to be a presumption of guilt.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 12:59 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
(06-02-2012 12:58 PM)satan69 Wrote:  The only time someone should be presumed guilty is when it comes to bail. If they arrest someone that had 10 dead bodies in his fridge, he shouldn't get bail. It is actually in the law that you don't get bail if your a danger to the public. In that sense, I guess there needs to be a presumption of guilt.

We already do that though. Heinous crimes usually don't get bail set.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 01:04 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the father of the "Daictatorship of the Proletariat" in Russia is quoted as uttering the following dictum:

Quote:It is better to arrest 100 innocent people than to risk one guilty going free

Looks like we have been embracing this principle wholeheartedly since 9/11 Angry
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 01:17 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
(06-02-2012 12:58 PM)satan69 Wrote:  The only time someone should be presumed guilty is when it comes to bail. If they arrest someone that had 10 dead bodies in his fridge, he shouldn't get bail. It is actually in the law that you don't get bail if your a danger to the public. In that sense, I guess there needs to be a presumption of guilt.

But this is not a presumption of guilt; it is weighing the evidence and making an informed decision about the probability of risk of harm or flight vs. the presumption of innocence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
06-02-2012, 08:20 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
Yes, Innocent Until Proven Guilty, of course. I don't see any other way to look at it.

Humankind Dodgy (a total misnomer)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 08:55 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
I love things like this. This is one of those things that large numbers of people like to claim they believe in (and probably believe they believe in) but when it comes to it they don't.

The recent example in the media over here would be John Terry. He was England's captain in football until he was stripped of the captaincy a few days ago. He lost the captaincy because he's been accused of racism by another player, leading to a minor outcry and public condemnation by several well known people in the world of football. He goes to court in July, which makes me think it's a bit premature for people to condemn him, and to sanction him. I'm sure all those involved would say they believed in 'innocent til proven guilty' if you asked them but I don't find their actions to be in-keeping with that philosophy.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-02-2012, 11:44 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
(06-02-2012 08:55 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  I love things like this. This is one of those things that large numbers of people like to claim they believe in (and probably believe they believe in) but when it comes to it they don't.

The recent example in the media over here would be John Terry...

Might this be similar to the bail situation? I don't personally see this as a presumption of guilt, but rather a precautionary measure.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 10:32 AM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
I think the whole issue depends on a balance of citizen rights and the safety of the country. Indeed, it is fair for the accused to remain innocent until proven guilty. From what I have heard, people from the United States usually value their rights more.

In both Singapore and Malaysia, there is the Internal Security Act (ISA). It allows the government the right to arrest and preventively detain individuals without trial for up to two years at a time in certain defined circumstances. There are people who oppose the law for it threatens civil liberties, while there are people who support the law for its ability to safeguard the nation against threats effectively. The ISA is used only when prosecution is not practical and the threat to national security must be dealt with promptly, a last resort measure in other words.

Safeguards however have been implemented, such that the ISA cannot be abused. This ensures a system where the rights of the detainees are being taken care of.

Even so, such a system may not be perfect, but in my opinion, ensures the stability and security of a country.

Welcome to science. You're gonna like it here - Phil Plait

Have you ever tried taking a comfort blanket away from a small child? - DLJ
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 10:47 AM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
(09-02-2012 10:32 AM)robotworld Wrote:  I think the whole issue depends on a balance of citizen rights and the safety of the country. Indeed, it is fair for the accused to remain innocent until proven guilty. From what I have heard, people from the United States usually value their rights more.

In both Singapore and Malaysia, there is the Internal Security Act (ISA). It allows the government the right to arrest and preventively detain individuals without trial for up to two years at a time in certain defined circumstances. There are people who oppose the law for it threatens civil liberties, while there are people who support the law for its ability to safeguard the nation against threats effectively. The ISA is used only when prosecution is not practical and the threat to national security must be dealt with promptly, a last resort measure in other words.

Safeguards however have been implemented, such that the ISA cannot be abused. This ensures a system where the rights of the detainees are being taken care of.

Even so, such a system may not be perfect, but in my opinion, ensures the stability and security of a country.

Do you really believe that there are, or can be, "sufficient safeguards"?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: