If someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you should not have hundreds or even thousands of people who don’t agree.
Advertisements
If someone is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you should not have hundreds or even thousands of people who don’t agree.
Nebraska - Criminal Defense & Civil Investigations 308.390.4931
Examining the Evidence From The State of Texas v. Darlie Routier
Independent Blogger of the Year, The Comment Awards 2016 & 2017
science & evidence blog
Journey into the mind of Edward Wayne Edwards
Lifestyle, Sports and Entertainment
Victim of false allegations by drug addicts who made a scene to dissuade Jason from reporting a theft to the police.
by exposing corruption in our justice system
Advocates for the humane, compassionate treatment of all incarcerated women.
"a nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves"--edward r. murrow
20 Years Too Long
on Texas death row, executed January 20, 2016, Rest in Peace
Helping Women in Prison
Res ipsa loquitur - The thing itself speaks
In the current many HS cases the words beyond reasonable doubt are not used. The culture of You will be believed is used. The accuser is called the victim. The accused is sat behind a glass case with a police officer. Proper cross examination is not allowed. And Corroboratve evidence is not required. There are many wrongly convicted as a result of this. It is all wrong. These people have families. In my opinion the children and grandchildren of the wrongfully convicted are victims of child abuse. The system has inflicted this abuse on them. These trials are not fair trials. They should have been thrown out by the judge. If there is no corroborative evidence there should not be a trial. I am ashamed of this country. It has a justice system that allows innocent people to be convicted of non existent crimes.