Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: AppyPappy
Perhaps others will dally and feint with you on this so as to chance to explain it to you. I'm shall just repeat as often as you rejoin -- "It is presumption of guilt."
24 posted on 08/14/2002 5:54:49 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]


To: bvw
Why is Westerfield on trial?
26 posted on 08/14/2002 6:11:29 AM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: bvw
Presumption of innocence or presumption of guilt is something that occures prior to a trial. During a trial this presumption either way ceases to exist as evidence is laid out.

It is not accurate to state that a juror is operating under a "presumption of guilt" after the prosecution has made its case. And a defendents decision to not testify and refute damaging testimony is something that most jurors will consider. (right or wrong) But it has nothing to do with presumption of guilt. It has to do with a damaging case being made, and a defendent's lack of ability to refute the charges.

49 posted on 08/14/2002 6:42:36 AM PDT by kjam22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson