WhiteDove

Actually Guaranteeing the presumption of innocence extends beyond the judicial system. For instance, in many countries journalistic codes of ethics state that journalists should refrain from referring to suspects as though their guilt is certain. For example, they use "suspect" or "defendant" when referring to the suspect, and use "allegedly" when referring to the criminal activity that the suspect is accused of. I think we covered victims already. I'm not by the way seeing many here posting, just a bunch of internet wannabees who read a story and feel inclined to pass some judgment on something they were not present for .Tell me again exactly how many rapes were you present for? Those would not be victims by definition. Nope those are people stating opinions.

Well perhaps your agenda precludes you from seeing basic human rights. The people of the United States have rejected the alternative to a presumption of innocence — a presumption of guilt — as being inquisitorial and contrary to the principles of a free society.

Last I looked Rape is a legal crime, it is against the law Note the word LAW. that is exctly why it is in the legal catagory.

Yeah his point is totaly irrelevant he needs to prove his ,it was not my point. I agree.

Dentist Claims Breast Massage Necessary Treatment Here So I guess we have established that professionals just like the rest of us have opinions ,that does not make them true necessarily ,nor confirm a point.

I don't recall saying anyone did. When you have some to offer then you can make claims.

Well you see that is where you are wrong and by the way you have offered no proof of your claim. You don't because there is none, it is fabricated. Misrepresenting someone is against the rules here by the way and I have clearly over the years been consistent in my statements not to mention on this thread alone. You continue to misrepresent my words. I'll state it one more time after that I'll assume you wish to deliberately disregard the rules. I have accused no one of making false statements, rather I have consistently stated that any statements made were in fact just that words, on the internet no less, made by largely people that remain nameless. testimony on the other hand is documented with the party giving it documented by name. There has been accounts given of two sides to a story one of rape one of willing relationships both remain undocumented with anything more than "I say so" one is free to pick which ever they choose, flip a coin ,make a guess, but in the end it is a choice based not on any proof physical evidence, but opinion on the internet. With the exception of those who were directly involved in which case only they know what actually happened. There has been no record of any charges filed so no burden of guilt has or can be confirmed, as such no claim of guilt may be made, there is none to claim legally. Since no legal crime has been committed, accused, charged, found guilty, had due process of law then one is free to offer an opinion on any matter they want ,including why they think one might be guilty. Others are free to point out that no guilt has been established and offer reasons why such accounts may be influenced by bias. As I stated undocumentable. What anyone believes one way or the other is an opinion, it does not prove or disprove any record, it is simply one choice in the matter. What I said remains true and that is the claims have not been, nor can they be proven or disproved with the vocal words we have presently, they are undocumentable. They are so because what you have and choose to believe are one side of the story the other has not been told, nor is it likely to for obvious reasons. What you or I choose to believe or accept does not guarantee truth it may or may not be so . It is neither proved right or wrong it is simply a testimony that has yet to be supported with actual factual evidence, nor stood the test of law. Your choice to accept it because of your bias toward the group does not make something true. No more so than someone's support of the same does. What you or I choose to believe is simply that what we choose to believe, that is not necessarily the same as true. Because it has not had the benefit of factual documentation, with due process of law, I choose to take a neutral position not pass judgments on undocumented personal testimony because there is neither enough weight to sway the scale of justice in either direction. Another words innocent until proven guilty. As such I can render the information neither true nor false so it remains undocumentable. (proven neither true or false) despite what one may believe one way or another.

Which means claiming any guilt of a crime that was not, by your standards is delusional. It seems none has been established since no legal artifacts have been met. Therefore it is opinion.

Their right gives them the oppertunity to state their opinion not confirm guilt with out others rights being protected just as theirs are.

Last I looked I started this thread and that is not the topic I have no obligation to proove your claims. I'm discussing accusations against Wierwille here.

WOW we have no point, so we have reduced ourselves to silly rhymes impressive...... Wrong I'm not the one claiming him guilty of a crime .

Your confused again, I never accused anyone of such rhetoric, what I did say and the record will bear out, is that one side of the story has been told only , and on the internet no less, and as such they are undocumented claims that have no hard physical evidence to establish them as fact or not, unless you have some you wish to offer of said claims. as such no claim of guilt has been established , Wierwille's state of life or death has nothing to do with documentation, one either has the evidence or not to present. Those that claim him guilty of crimes must satisfy their claim with the burden of proof. Other wise it is an opinion not conformation of guilt and should be noted as such.

I don't see where he specified non professionals , yoiu assume that because it goes along with your point.

No they don't the burdon of proof is on the accuser. Not my judgement it is correct speaking and the law as well.

Exactly right, some people like to have factual documentation , some just accept whatever someone's says as fact, especially if it fits with their agenda.

I find it surprising that some continue to misrepresent others point of view despite numerous times it has been clarified. It has been well established that I have never made claim that anyone was a liar, nor have I said anyone was. My claim has been consistent the information is not documented by any hard evidence. But for the record I'll clarify again. What I said remains true and that is the claims have not been nor can they be proven or disproved they are undocumentable. You may choose to believe one side of the story the other has not been told, nor is it likely to for obvious reasons. What you or I choose to believe or accept does not guarantee truth it may or may not be so . It is neither proved right or wrong it is simply a testimony that has yet to be supported with actual factual evidence, nor stood the test of law. You choose to accept it because of your bias toward the group that does not make something true. No more so than someone's support of the same does. What you or I choose to believe is simply that what we choose to believe, that is not necessarily the same as true. Because it has not had the benefit of factual documentation, with due process of law, I choose to not pass judgments on undocumented personal testimony. Another words innocent until proven guilty. As such I can render the information neither true nor false so it remains undocumentable. (proven neither true or false) despite what one may believe one way or another

The article you posted is one persons opinion, It does offer a hint as to why NBC news finishes a poor third in the ratings Well he may be tired of it that people call him on poor reporting, but it does not change the fact that apparently others constantly see it as a problem. Perhaps he should ask himself why that is?

Gee sorry those definitions get in your way, good luck with letting the words speak whatever you like to hear.

Yep more change we can believe in..........

I agree our rights are slipping away. Exactly why we must speak up.

Your choice, and in general as I have stated many times I believe that routine things generally people are truthful in ,but matters of crimes I require more,while you may not,your choice. People here want to see bad they thrive on it, lots of reasons to give them what they want, to be the poster that shared some new juicy tidbit, other motives as well. one just never knows. I've seen things embraced as truth only a few pages later to be fished out as bull. Sorry I wont lay blame of criminal guilt with that kind of record.

No I have never said that ,what I said was first hand accounts are first hand accounts if one can use them as talking points then the other can as well. She seems bent on discrediting my posts for something she does as well, speak of things as factual from others accounts.reading here and claiming as fact is no different than hearing something first hand and claiming as fact. If being present is the qualifier to posting then speking of guilt in crimes requires one to be there as well. if not it is not personal experiance.