Guilty?

[Omni]

Taken from my law class:

 

As a society are we:

"Guilty until proven innocent? Or Innocent until proven guilty

 

What do you believe we are?

[dotfire]

The latter; in fact even that is not enough to prevent cases of people being convicted for the wrong crime, easily a worse case than letting a guilty man go free

[Anthoni]

I think it should be guilty until proven innocent. it may not seem fair, but it yeah.

[Spittles]

I believe you are a tough guy and when I see you I will slap the **** out of you

Sup keyboard warrior

 

 

 

OT: I believe it's innocent until proven guilty.

[Bloody 2h]

Innocent until proven guilty.

[Sparatic Gun]

Needs to be a word for inbetween. Suspect just doesn't do it

[Dr Cake Town]

must be the simplest law class ever lmfao

[Anthoni]

must be the simplest law class ever lmfao

How is that?

 

and this is really just an opinion question you idiot.

[Dr Cake Town]

How is that?

 

and this is really just an opinion question you idiot.

Because the intro to american gov class i took last year asked me that question.

 

 

The law class I took last semester had math equations in it :down:

[M4G1CA]

Innocent until proven guilty

[Inu]

No one's ever innocent in this world

[Midas]

Innocent until proven guilty. Otherwise we'd have a shitload of guilty people.

[Kaleb]

In the eyes of the public: Guilty until proven innocent and remain guilty in many's eyes.

 

Law-wise: Innocent until proven guilty.

[Mandy]

No one's ever innocent in this world

 

I am :whistling:

 

@topic

Innocent until proven guilty

[Cpt Jack]

Guilty until proven innocent. Obviously if someone would go through so much trouble to make you appear in court, they would have a reason behind it (Unless they were trying to frame you).

[Fatall]

Like all philosphical questions, it's often not either. It all depends on the case at hand. For example if a person was murdered and there was another person found with him at that specific time/date. He/she should be detained untill further evidence is aquired. However if they suspect his girlfriend killed him out of spite after he broke up with her, however she wasn't anywhere at the scene of the crime and lets say it was a knife which killed him. They shouldn't be able to detain her on just mere suspicon.

These are just examples, in real life the situation is usually much more complicated.

[Num Nums]

Innocent until proven guilty always!

 

Guilty until proven innocent is a load of ********

and would cause a bunch more false charges than there is currently in the law system.

[Scott]

The European Convention on Human Rights established the "burden of proof" in European law, thus providing the term of innocent until proven guilty on which most of the English Legal System is situated. However, in some aspects of the law this is not the case. For example, when pleading insanity on a murder trial, the burden of proof switches from the prosecution to the defendant.

 

A violation of human rights? Possibly. Fair? Definitely.

[Acid-Sun]

We are most definitely guilty until proven innocent in my opinion, because even if you did not do it you still need a good lawyer (money) to have a chance of not going to prison/jail for X amount of time, but also this discussion is kind of a is the glass half-empty or half-full thing.

[Tayyab-]

Innocent until proven guilty

 

[Cronic Ko]

Innocent until proven guilty