Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: cyn
I think those statements just make Stone and Kimberly fair-minded peoplw who believe in operating under the law. After all, there have been assertions that Bergdahl is a traitor, and from what I have heard he does have a case to answer. He and his family do seem to have "gone native" a bit. But, he is still "innocent until proven guilty". He still has the right to rebut allegations. Just because liberals jump to conclusions doesn't mean we should do the same.

My understanding (and legal experts on here may know more) is that a treason charge is a particularly difficult one to prove at the best of times. I believe the onus of proof is particularly high.

11 posted on 06/03/2014 11:33:27 PM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Vanders9
"innocent until proven guilty"

That is "presumed innocent until proven guilty". It's legalese and has nothing to do with anyone's opinion except those on the jury. OJ is guilty even though not convicted. Soldiers who were stationed with him have come forward and said he told them he was leaving. E-mails to his father indicated his disillusion. His actions of sending his personal effects home indicate something. Leaving a note indicating he was heading out say he was a deserter. Asking villagers directions to the Taliban is a red flag. I do not presume him to be innocent even if he says he is.

19 posted on 06/04/2014 11:59:27 AM PDT by Starstruck (If my reply offends, you probably don't understand sarcasm or criticism...or do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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