Listener Feedback on Justice System

Posted by Jim Spence on Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Labels:
Ladies and Gentlemen of the NewsNM Team, I have noticed on several occasions that the phrase "Innocent until proven Guilty" has been used on air. Though it often stated as such in discussion and debate, I believe this statement to be in error. Under US law the accused is "Presumed Innocent until proven Guilty" in the eyes of the Court (or Law). The distinction between "Innocent" and "Presumed Innocent" is significant. So much so, that the court does not deliver a verdict on the Innocence of the accused. Verdicts are delivered as Guilty, Not Guilty or Acquitted; and reflects solely on what the available evidence can show. An accused person can not actually be 'innocent until proven guilty'. Their innocence (or lack thereof) is determined by their actions, not the court. The verdict of the court will not change the status of a persons innocence. Thank you for your time. Kyle Buller
Share/Bookmark

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your guest is correct. One cannot plead innocent. One pleads not guilty.

And the "innocent until proven guilty" paradigm does not exist in formal law such as the Constitution. It is more of the "due process" of the system.

Many listeners might be surprised to know that the state and most people assume one is guilty until proven not guilty. Our persecutor system (the DAs) follows this idea.

The duty of the DAs is to provide justice but most are concerned with notches on their gun to prove their "law and order" stance. There are literally hundreds of innocent people incarcerated in the US. Even Judge Napolitano of FOX has stated he knew cops lied when he was in office.

Check out:

www.injusticeeverywhere.com

and

www.copblock.org

for more info.

February 16, 2011 at 2:03 PM

Post a Comment