Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (73793)	9/2/2003 9:48:17 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Good post. A "guilty" person need not be legally so or convicted as such. Legal absolution does not absolve the moral or actual criminality of the person. CH would probably try to rest upon his definition of "legal". However his posts stand as recorded, and demonstrate his attempts to mislead.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (73793)	9/2/2003 11:07:36 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

It is true, a jury doesn't find a defendant innocent. They don't need to. The defendant starts out innocent. All the jury can do is rule whether they stay innocent, or whether they are found guilty. If you start with a white sheet of paper, you can turn it black, but you can't turn it white because it's already that. A defendant is innocent until proven guilty. She is not "not guilty until proven guilty." She is "innocent until proven guilty." Repeat it three times. Innocent, innocent, innocent. EOD.