While reading my psychology book...

[sith_empress]

I came across this statement.

"...juries [who] must assume innocence unless guilt is proven, because they would rather risk setting free a guilty person than convicting an innocent person."

Now call me an asshole/d-bag/bitch/heartless blob, but I don't agree. At all.

Comments

[robot_vs_ninja]

This is why you're not involved in the court system.

I think that understand where the idea of innocent until proven guilty is important

[sith_empress]

I understand it but I think it's ridiculous. Letting guilty people go because they might be innocent? So they can go out and murder and rape some more? Yeah that's a great idea.

[robot_vs_ninja]

What? you make no sense

Innocent until proven guilty.

Without sufficient proof of guilt, how can you honestly put someone in prison?

I mean, the system is flawed, guilty people get off, innocent people are found guilty, it happens. There's no court system that is flawless

[sith_empress]

I understand what innocent until proven guilty means. I just don't like it that murderers and rapists etc. get off the hook. Of course I don't have a solution and I know the system is flawed and there's no way of rectifying that, but I don't know...

Anyways I'm an asshole and I know it.

[robot_vs_ninja]

It doesn't make you an asshole

It makes you and whiner.

You're just going to sit around and bitch about a system that is obviously flawed and we all know it? great...

[heart_of_texas]

its better to bitch about something, because then it at least has the CHANCE of getting fixed. It think its much worse to completely indifferent. And she wasn't whining, learn to read please before making comments.

[robot_vs_ninja]

1. There is no way our court can be "fixed." Don't be ridiculous

2. If I wanted your opinion, or if I wanted you in this argument, I would have asked. So maybe next time don't tread on waters that with which you're not familiar.

[robot_vs_ninja]

should read: "...waters with which..."

Take out the "that"