greengoblin wrote:
Can we consider thread this now "put to bed "?
Almost
. I see the IPCC (the police one, not the climate one
) has been out among the public today asking for eyewitnesses. Doesn't look like they're trying to sweep it under the carpet, and if you think back to the Steven Waldorf and James Ashley incidents there were investigations for both. Trials too, though not guilty verdicts in both cases, (which was a bit surprising given that Ashley didn't even have his clothes on when he was shot dead by police, and you have to wonder how they thought that a naked man was a danger to them - presumably the jury got to hear more than the rest of us).
PaulF wrote:
At major trials, everyone is presumed innocent.... But someone has to do the 'accusing' someone has to do the 'prosecuting' and there has to be a trial of some description to test the evidence of what went on.
That's true, but the presumption that there must be a trial is, IMO, presuming evidence of a crime that has yet to be found and may not actually exist. To put it another way, it's wrong and also pointless to demand a trial unless the evidence points towards a crime, and at the moment we don't know if it will or not.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
