Innocent until proven guilty...or really the other way round?

by FreedomFrog 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  FreedomFrog

  Ok, most of the criminals do need to be put away, but there are some out there that get trapped into a situation and had to spend time in prison for a crime they didn't commit. Some are held without bail until trial.

  On CNN about the JonBenet's case they stated '"John Karr is presumed innocent," she said, adding that investigators had "much more work" to do and urging people not to rush to judgment." Though upon reading the CNN report futher, he is in custody from what I'm understanding. This isn't a question of whether or not is he guilty, it's more of a question what do they mean by "innocent until proven guilty"?

  Are people REALLY "innocent" until proven guilty? It doesn't seem like that to me. Shouldn't it be more like "guilty until proven innocent"? I mean, isn't that what they do anyway?

  Just curious.
• 

  zeroday

  You may find this difficult to believe, but in most countries outside the US you are indeed, "GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.''

  Wrap your little liberatarian mind around that.
• 

  FreedomFrog

  That's my point Zero, it seems to me that the US wants to have that "freedom" thought, yet they really don't. If you're a major suspect in a crime, you're off to jail until the trial. So really the US is just like the rest of the other countries...aren't they?
• 

  Arthur

  Are people REALLY "innocent" until proven guilty? It doesn't seem like that to me. Shouldn't it be more like "guilty until proven innocent"? I mean, isn't that what they do anyway?

  Well, each case is different.

  In the case of O.J Simpson, it was "innocent; no matter what the facts show."

  In the case of Robert Blake, it was "innocent; because his wife was sleazy."

  In the case of Michael Jackson, it was "innocent; because we love his music."
• 

  looking_glass

  Well in a court of law there is the burden of proof to get over in order to either prove guilt. However, the law according to the average viewing public, guilt is generally presumed. We have a tendency to try a person in the public first. Though I do believe that where there is smoke there is fire. As for whether Karr is guilty or not, I don't know, but I do think he is a perv and should be kept away from children for the rest of his life.
• 

  zeroday

  That's my point Zero, it seems to me that the US wants to have that "freedom" thought, yet they really don't. If you're a major suspect in a crime, you're off to jail until the trial. So really the US is just like the rest of the other countries...aren't they?

  And that's where we differ from the rest of the world. Ever heard of a little thing called, "HABeaus CORUPS, other wise known as "DUE PROCESS.' Ever heard of B A I L..... Yes it really does exist. You can actually be charged for a crime and be let off on BAIL till your trial. Imagine that, no where else though.
• 

  FreedomFrog

  Arthur, in each of these cases, they were "arrested"...

  In the case of Robert Blake here's what I found...

  Arrest and trial for murder

  He was arrested on April 18, 2002, and charged in connection with the murder of his wife.

  I haven't taken the time for the other 2, but I remember both O.J. and Micheal Jackson being arrested before the trial. Again, I'm not pointing out whether they WERE guilty or not, I'm finding it interesting that they were arrested THEN a trial to prove their innocents.
• 

  Robdar

  FF, it's a valid question. Nevermind that bug up zero's ass.

  IMO, "Innocent until proven guilty" is all a bunch of double speak.

  Sure, if it's a high profile crime or if you have a lot of money, you're "innocent until proven guilty." If you are poor, or if the media hasn't noticed you, you can pretty much bet that you are guilty until proven innocent. In this country, you will get all the justice that you can afford. You get what you pay for.
• 

  outoftheorg

  If you want to experience the real Guilty until proven Innocent and its difference to legal actions taken for felonies in the USA , Go down to Mexico and get dragged into their legal operations.

  You will fall into love for the system used in the USA.

  Outoftheorg
• 

  FreedomFrog

  FF, it's a valid question. Nevermind that bug up zero's ass.

  Thank you. I do understand what zero is talking about with the bail and such, but you're right also in that "bail" is really if you're rich or not. If you can't afford bail money you're screwed.

  An example of this is I had a friend that was being beaten by her ex-husband, she fought back and SHE was the one thrown into jail. Since she was from Cambodian(sp?) and moved with her ex-husband here, she didn't have a green card yet. She had no money and she didn't know English. I had to help her with bail money, but for 3 days she was locked up. I helped her find a lawyer, I helped her learn a bit of English...it took me close to 2 years. The lawyer was able to get a translator and when she had her day in court, she was INNOCENT. Though, because she was poor, couldn't speak our language, she was screwed. The law took the word of her well spoken husband. They found out that HE was the one that was trying to kill her...and she was trying to protect herself. Getting "bail" does not work in some cases. In fact, sometimes you're held without bail.

  So in reality, in this country, we ALSO are "guilty" until proven innocent. In the case of my friend, she is doing better and she's divorce, but she needed the system to work for her during that time, but she was let down. I think it's a shame.