Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2012, 11:00 AM
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. 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.


Kind of like her. People were ready to hang her before the trial had even started.

[Image: casey-anthony-trial-18994411jpg]

“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
09-02-2012, 07:02 PM
RE: Do you believe in “Innocent until proven guilty”?
(09-02-2012 10:47 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(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"?

I don't think so, as currently even with the safeguards implemented, the detainees claim that they are being abused and humiliated during their detention period. Some detainees are being caught under the ISA due to different political ideologies. There can be room for improvement, but such a system, although able to maintain a certain level of security, can never be really perfected.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: