“The facts of the case haven’t been tried yet, you don’t know what the facts are, and you are giving them no presumption of innocence.”
—
No one is under any obligation to give anyone a presumption of innocence.And no one does - if all the posts that cited this person or that person of being guilty of this or that were removed from FR, 95 percent of the content here would be gone. Just be mostly some cat videos and a few gardening hints that would remain.
So, it’s completely dishonest to claim “people don’t judge! They can’t”. That’s total horsehockey - sorry. Again, this is just the reality of how things are, facts rule the day.
Since I’m one of the very few here who is informed on the facts, I will make the best judgement. While I have some fun, kidding and getting a goat now & then, everything I cite as specific fact is verified, no emotion involved.
e.g. it’s a fact the older defendant has a history of mental illness and was under treatment. That’s just a matter of record.
I speculate there may be retardation also, but that’s just a personal observation based on his words/actions. I can also speculate he might raise his mental issues in his defense - “temporary insanity” pleas don’t usually work, but it could show a circumstance limiting his mental/moral abilities to process things.
At any rate, possessing such a fact (re:his mental health problems) that most are not aware of hereabout is just one example of why I’m so well qualified to render judgement. Unlike many others, I simply am informed.
You’re just pushing your opinion as fact, simple as that.
They aren’t guilty of anything at all until they are found guilty in a court of law.