vick told NO camp

King Glorious · #1 07-26-2007, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Speed limits laws and fighting and killing dogs are a bit different. I see what you are trying to say, but fail to see the relevance. I'm not going to argue this anymore. I've wasted enough time. Either you are playing dumb, are dumb or just having fun trying to be different. Either way, the facts keep coming out and while you keep squirming out of it, it's inevitable, Vick's days are numbered.

What the hell am I squirming out of? I said if he's found guilty, he should pay the price. How is that squirming out? I have never said I don't think he's guilty. What is sad is that this is America and u are saying I'm trying to be different by suggesting we use due process and then decide. Wow. I'm trying to be different by suggesting we uphold the Constitution. That's a sad indictment on our country today. The funny thing is that I agree with u that it's very likely his days are numbered. There is a good chance that he's going to be found guilty and will be banned from football and likely will do some jail time. The only thing at issue is that u want that decision made BEFORE he has a chance at trial and I'm suggesting something radical, like waiting till AFTER he has had a trial.

ArlJim78 · #2 07-26-2007, 09:48 AM

one side says that what he is accused of is wrong and he should pay the prices for it once due process has run its course.

the other side says what he is accused of is no big deal but since it is against the law he should pay the price once due process has run its course.

the rest is just obfuscation.

no one is advocating a short circuit of his rights. what is appalling though is that there are still people around that would have no problem with dog-fighting being legal because it doesn't bother them.

Mortimer · #3 07-26-2007, 10:49 AM

I must chime in with yer basic eloquence.

In short...

....the "innocent until proven guilty" is a jury instruction....I believe.

If it were taken any further ...what sense would this make:

"Mr. INSERT NAME HERE...we are the police and we are arresting you as you are presumed innocent of killing Mr. VICTIM."

"Mr. INSERT NAME HERE...I am the judge and bound you over to the county jail unless you can produce a $2,000,000 cash bond,,,,as we presume you innocent until proven guilty."

So people are allowed to have opinions as to whether a charged person is gulity or not even before they are proven guity,guilty,guilty,guilty.Even the police and judges may assume that innocent person is guilty.

It jist don't git no simpler 'in 'at.

byalip · #4 07-27-2007, 05:50 AM

Any one who thinks you're a simple jokester, just along for the ride or a disruptive presence .... should remember this eloquent, logical and well-phrased post.

100 PIES. The best.

It don't git any better 'en this.

See ya later!

Danzig · #5 07-27-2007, 06:48 AM

it is a jury instruction that you make no decision one way or the other til all facts are heard, and the trial is over, and the jury has deliberated. we found one guy guilty, the other not guilty. the second guy may well have been guilty, but it was he said, she said, and certainly not shown beyond a REASONABLE doubt. not some doubt, but reasonable. very important!