Armchair criminal lawyers and prosecutors are as useful as armchair brain surgeons or rocket

[Fred Sanders]

scientists.

Amusing and fun they are, but not professional, and as accurate as a peashooter at a 1000 yards.

For all those who prefer the Court of Public Opinion and Media Juries over actual lawyers, judges and juries, you should have your next brain surgery or rocket launch done by the Rude Pundit or equal, if you likely the internet Instant Justice better.

No, I am not defending the The Hot Baby accused, or the hundreds of horrid cases of crime each day never reported nationally, i am defending The Golden Thread, innocent until proven guilty, proof beyond a reasonable doubt, it is the bedrock of Western justice, and if you do not like it, try the inquisitorial system of Mexico.

Verdct first, sentence later, it is not the other way around. For anyone, except maybe The Red Queen down a rabbit hole. Internet lynch mobs are usually not very fair or rational.

The more outraged the public juries of news reports, the more outrageous the alleged crime, the less sympathy worthy, the more we need the concept of innocent until proven guilty.

The wheels of justice turn far too slowly for the internet's liking, I get it, but too freaking bad for you.

The drooling armchair jury is dismissed.

[aikoaiko]

1. Its just the internet. No harm done.

[UTUSN]

2. I learned this during theFITZmas non-indictment of KKKarl during the Keith-David SHUSTER heyday here

Every night for weeks, David SHUSTER would be "reporting" that the KKKarl indictment was coming down anytime in the next few weeks, based on his "sources."

"Sources" implied somebody with first hand knowledge of the inside of THIS specific grand jury and/or FITZGERALD's staff.

When the danged thing didn't happen, SHUSTER petulantly revealed who his "sources" were: Turned out they were attorneys with vast experience with grand juries. OTHER grand juries, nothing inside this one or FITZGERALD's staff. Iow, they were acting as PUNDITS.

[MohRokTah]

3. You might want to rethink using the internet.

Also rethink reading any printed news media, watching television news media, or listening to the radio.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. Nice sermon.

Now answer a question for me, O learned one: this presumption of innocence you speak of--does it constrain courts, or does it constrain message boards?

When setting out to morally lord yourself over others, it's often a good idea to know what you're talking about.

[Fred Sanders]

10. Well, it does not "constrain" courts or the internet, so you will have to do better with analogies.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Yes, presumption of innocence most certainly does constrain the courts.

Our legal system is kind of based on the notion.

[TorchTheWitch]

5. you forgot the rest

Innocent until proven guilty and proof beyond a reasonable doubt IN A COURT OF LAW. Does DU look like a court of law to you? And because it isn't just how is it that everyone is totally clueless about any case until it goes through trial? Yeah, sure. We're all just as dumb as a box of rocks because the trial isn't over yet though he'll be found guilty any and for good reason. Because we aren't dumb as a box of rocks.

Eh, heck with it. This is just stupid.

>>>CLICK<<<

[etherealtruth]

6. Right

... because internet discussion boards are the same as courts of law

[Bluenorthwest]

7. The worst are the armchair sermonizers

When you ask them a direct and pertinent question they run away. A skittish and uninformed lot.

[WinkyDink]

8. I find your opinion quite useless; indeed, beyond useless to drooling inanity.

[Boom Sound 416]

9. Gee, were you around last June?