Show of HandsShow of Hands

Whichendisup June 4th, 2014 1:23pm

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a limitation not often applied in the "court of public opinion".

22 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

catpillow Florida West Coast
06/06/14 12:26 am

We do love to gossip. That's fine. Just don't tell us it's news.

Shazam Scaramouche, OH
06/04/14 12:12 pm

The HUGE problem I continue to have with this is they have Talkshows (Hannety, Maddow, O'Reilly, Nancy Grace etc.) who spout wild insane conjecture that they claim 1st A protection under "F of Press. They are NOT the press!

Zod Above Pugetropolis
06/04/14 7:22 am

It's a limitation not generally applied in the court of court opinion either. Hence the reason the "innocent" (but probably not) pays bail or sits in jail waiting for a trial. Or ordered held without bail even though they are "presumed innocent"?

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 8:12 am

poss but they don't hold everyone as far as I understood. I thought they only held those that were considered a real danger (murderer with strong proof?) or a flight risk. bail - dunno, does that actually assume guilt? not sure.

Zod Above Pugetropolis
06/04/14 12:38 pm

It shows in some cases the courts presume the strong possibility of guilt and act accordingly in the interest of public safety. If we actually presumed innocence, cops wouldn't even carry handcuffs - you wouldn't be arrested until found guilty.

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 12:45 pm

poss, but I think that takes the ideology farther than it was either intended or is pragmatic. If a cop stops someone actually in the process of stabbing someone does that not require a balance between the theory & practice? public opinion rarely

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 12:47 pm

deals with a problem as immediate as that. there is a luxury of time that it had that law enforcement may not.

that might be the argument that the public should try a little harder at the "innocent until proven guilty" assumption given that a

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 12:49 pm

person's life can be easily destroyed by the accusation even if they've never been charged our find innocent. their reputation could be indelibly changed. people have lost the ability to get a job bec of this.

seems pretty sad to me how easily it

Zod Above Pugetropolis
06/04/14 12:53 pm

Yeah, I'm not arguing for an end to arrests or jails, just making the point that "innocent until proven guilty" isn't actually a thing. False statements made about someone fall under slander or libel laws and lawsuits, not free speech.

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 1:02 pm

but we both know how infrequently those lawsuits are filed and brought to trial successfully. the system seems to be stacked against those that have been slandered/libelled bec of how strongly we believe in free speech.

Whichendisup uniquely unoriginal
06/04/14 1:03 pm

it should be a thing since it's something held up as one of the great pillars of our society.

chickencookie Biden crime syndicate
06/04/14 6:49 am

Yes especially in the big cases like OJ ( guilty), Jodi Arias (guilty) and Casey Anthony(guilty). In all of these cases most of the public had a guilty opinion Unfortunately in the case of mother of the year, only the idiots of Pinnelas Cty

chickencookie Biden crime syndicate
06/04/14 6:49 am

Disagreed with the whole country and let her go.

Kay41 the Midwest
06/04/14 6:48 am

So very true! And I am guilty of this too.

EarlyBird Portland
06/04/14 6:42 am

It's a fact!

06/04/14 6:31 am

Very true.

Nemacyst No Lives Matter
06/04/14 6:25 am

This user is currently being ignored

smacc DunningKruger
06/04/14 8:04 am

But you are choosing to make a decision of guilt based on incomplete information. You could easily do the right thing and wait for an informed decision.