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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sylvester80 who wrote (49710)	6/23/2004 6:22:15 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

I live in the USA. A person here is innocent of a crime until the person has been proven guilty of a specific crime in a court of law. Even at that time the person may have the right to appeal the court's decision, leaving the person's ultimate guilt up in the air. And though the person may be found guilty by the letter of the law, we don't claim to have privy to the condition of his soul, which could be judged differently. If the person has not been charged with a crime then the issue of legal proof does not apply. Yet, we may properly use the term in other contexts. That is, if I see a squirrel eating from my bird seed, I have satisfactory evidence which proves to me that the birds are not getting it all. Criminal charges and being proven guilty in a court becomes ... Not Applicable to the context. I may obtain proof of a science experiment by properly conducting my experiment using scientific method. Yet, a future scientist may come along with a new theory, apply it, and prove that his results are correct and mine were in error. Next question...