Boards Index › General discussion › Getting serious › can someone clear this up ? (yes mccanns again)
-
AuthorPosts
-
2 October, 2007 at 6:01 pm #287997
@pikey wrote:
It’s all bobbins anyway. In France, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, part of the French constitution, says “Everyone is supposed innocent until having been declared guilty.” Similarly, the code of criminal procedure declares “any suspected or prosecuted person is presumed to be innocent until their guilt has been established”.
Nice to see you, see you nice :wink:
2 October, 2007 at 6:35 pm #287998@Bad Manners wrote:
@pikey wrote:
It’s all bobbins anyway. In France, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, part of the French constitution, says “Everyone is supposed innocent until having been declared guilty.” Similarly, the code of criminal procedure declares “any suspected or prosecuted person is presumed to be innocent until their guilt has been established”.
I was just gonna point out the same thing. Beat me to it.
:wink:Point what out exactly? Dont you need an actual point in the first place to “point” something out?
You seem to be circling around this rather eroneous concept of judiciary like a fatty circling a chocolate dispenser with no change, as tho if you do it for long enough the status quo might change
Find the bit where is says someone is “above suspicion or investigation UNTIL proven guilty” and you would actually have the makings of a relevant point to extract from the essence of the law, but until you do find a passage that says that your trying to weave gold out of straw with it as someone being “innocent in the eyes of the law” until proven guilty doesnt mean they arent guilty, merely that it hasnt been proven yet and might not be, it also DOESNT mean they arent open for suspicion, theorisation, investigation or any other supposition or scrutiny of their possible guilt
A lack of the proof of guilt also ISNT proof of innocence, only proof of innocence is proof of innocence
So, the same passage is also saying that
“Although classed as innocent until proven otherwise, all people ARE potentially guilty until proven innocent” too
Whereas quite a few dimwits on here seem to think being innocent until proven guilty equates to being above the law, suspicion or investigation until proven guilty lol,
which is on a par with the acuracy of how a retarded 10 year old would try to reference einsteins theory of relativity having heard it only once before in a language they didnt even speak :lol: :lol: :lol:
2 October, 2007 at 6:43 pm #287999So what!
2 October, 2007 at 6:48 pm #288000@*Sian wrote:
So what!
I dont have a “so”ing machine, so so your own what :P :lol:
2 October, 2007 at 6:54 pm #288001 -
AuthorPosts
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!