Aquiel Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I'm sick of hearing that sentence being misused and thrown around the internet for all sorts of subjects that have nothing to do with law. For starters, "Innocent proven guilty" is not a universal rule, truth, or anything of that sort. It is only a logical stance that in a system of law, someone accused of something is innocent until proven guilty. If it wasnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t the case, anyone could simply sue their neighbour, and if the neighbour cannot prove he did not do what he is accused of, he would go to jail, which would be unfair. "Innocent proven guilty" is a little like saying to the plaintiff: YOU have to prove the defendant did it, the responsability of proof lies with you. If someone makes a claim that is very presumptious, it's only natural you ask for proof. But people often say instead "Oh well, innocent proven guilty right?", and let the liar get away with his lies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
____ Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 It's not the case in a lot of asian countries where you need to create reasonable doubt to your guilt, otherwise to jail you go. In otherwords: guilty till you prove, to some degree, that you are innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquiel Posted November 5, 2007 Author Share Posted November 5, 2007 It's not the case in a lot of asian countries where you need to create reasonable doubt to your guilt, otherwise to jail you go. In otherwords: guilty till you prove, to some degree, that you are innocent. Indeed. Adds to the argument that innocent until proven guilty is not a universal rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrOwez Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 it's not a universal law, but it's the earthly law and it makes perfect sense. A friend to all is a friend to none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLancer Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 It's not the case in a lot of asian countries where you need to create reasonable doubt to your guilt, otherwise to jail you go. In otherwords: guilty till you prove, to some degree, that you are innocent. Weird, I was going to mention the honor-based cultures in asia as well. In most Asian countries (especially east-asian), if your reputation is gone, you are *nothing*. You must earn your honor back by proving your innocence, thus shaming the person who falsely accused you. Yakuza, Triad and other dubious groups in asia have long exploited these cultural features, by for example stalking rich businessmen and recording them doing something embarrassing or inappropriate (such as a businessman with a family and children visiting a prostitute, or gambling illegally) then succesfully extorting them out of tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars in exchange for "silence". Because unlike in western cultures where in a twisted sense it's "ok" to be a 'b**ch' or 'greedy' or 'selling out', it's not the worldwide view. In a lot of countries you have to prove your innocence yourself as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 IFor starters, "Innocent proven guilty" is not a universal rule, truth, or anything of that sort. It is only a logical stance that in a system of law, someone accused of something is innocent until proven guilty. If it wasnÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t the case, anyone could simply sue their neighbour, and if the neighbour cannot prove he did not do what he is accused of, he would go to jail, which would be unfair. In this crackpot scenario, who do you consider the one who needs to do the proving? This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLancer Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Just look at Michael Jackson, just proves my point further... Hardly a case of "innocent until proven guilty" is it? The court ruled he had nothing to do with abusing children, and even found many of the kids lying by pressure of their parents in hopes of big money by winning the case. Even though Michael Jackson did nothing wrong and is innocent, people still make jokes of him abusing children even on popular shows like Conan O'Brien, because his reputation is already gone beyond any imaginable restoration. People would still react negatively to him in public, even though the man did nothing wrong. He may be able to live with himself, but in Japan, a person who's had his honor so badly damaged in public would commit suicide. Heck, look at the last Japanese minister of finance... The man committed suicide at age 61 because he was accused of taking bribes. Can you even imagine an european/american/african politician of briefly feeling guilty for doing that? They'd just have some lame response like "Come on, it's human nature" or "can you really cast the first rock" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernHero Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Heck, look at the last Japanese minister of finance... The man committed suicide at age 61 because he was accused of taking bribes. That is Ridiculous. Japanese have taken that honor thing little bit overboard imo. Western people have realized life is more than your reputation. ...Not saying honor is bad thing tho. The golden midway is the best way in this too. Reality is hundreds of times more beautiful and more interesting than delusions. Fairy tales just tend to be easier to follow than the wonderful intricacies of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgfuyfyuiuy0 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 To some extent, the "innocent until proven guilty' can be abused, but it doesn't mean that we should just ignore it after a while. The history of the "Innocent until proven guilty" came from The Salem Witch Trials. Basically, innocent people got hung without fair trial after those girls just randomly accused people. This was a big ordeal and had a great impact on America as a whole. The "Innocent until proven guilty" is taken seriously. Now, I understand how some people could abuse it, but technically it doesn't really matter all too much. Most people don't abuse it and get saved in the end. There's this one movie where a guy tries to prove that the "innocent until proven guilty" can be abused by the people who enforce it. He ends up getting charged for something he didn't do and he gets the death sentence. It's a pretty good movie. I don't remember the name, though :-k I <3 Gears of War 2. Add me on Xbox Live and mention you are from Tif :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron8000 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I'd rather "innocent until proven guilty" was abused and some guilty people escape rather then "guilty until proven innocent" and innocent people being convicted and imprisoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will H Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 I'd rather "innocent until proven guilty" was abused and some guilty people escape rather then "guilty until proven innocent" and innocent people being convicted and imprisoned. QFT. 'Innocent until proven guilty' is not a completely valid statement, it has the odd loophole, but it does facilitate a system of law which is more efficient and less prone to corruption than 'Guilty unless doubt of guilt'. The latter statement of reasoning has much larger and more numerous loopholes. I guess that's one of life's objectives. Find a better statement than 'Innocent until proven guilty'. :-k ~ W ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenin64 Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Can I just ask what QFT means? Also, I don't see how your scenario abuses the phrase...a guy lies and says he's "innocent until provne guilty" and gets away with it? Aren't most lies fairly easy to uncover? Besides, there's no real "innocence" there, or guilt. he;s just lying. Command the Murderous Chalices! Drink ye harpooners! drink and swear, ye men that man the deathful whaleboat's bow- Death to Moby Dick!BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubsa Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Can I just ask what QFT means? Quoted for Truth. It's kind of like a +1, but more polite and generally followed with another statement. Rather than "LOL" or clicking "Submit" This is how much you all raised for charity. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now