From: snow <snow@smoke.suba.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 18:09:25 -0800 (PST)
To: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
Subject: Re: Innocent until proven guilty
In-Reply-To: <v03007800aeb8f3907bb2@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <199611210226.UAA05592@smoke.suba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> 
> At 1:36 AM -0600 11/20/96, snow wrote:
> >> At 01:02 =EC=EC 19/11/1996 -0500, Clay Olbon II wrote:
> >> >with _serious_ issues of 'unemployability'., FURTHERMORE people are NEVER
> >> >guilty before PROVEN so. Guilt or Innocence is NOT a matter of 'opinion',
> >    Huh? People are most certainly guilty before "proven" so, the government
> >just isn't allowed to _assume_ their guilt, or to _act_ like they are guilty.
> >     If you purchase LSD in America, you are guilty of a felony--Drug
> >trafficing. Wether the court _finds_ you guilty or not is another story.
> 
> In this case, the putative crime is "drug trafficking" or "possession,"
> depending. One is still presumed innocent until proven guilty. To wit, the
                          ^^^^^^^^
> state must prove its case.
> I rather suspect that any prosecutors or defense lawyers on this list will
> confirm that an LSD case is hardly a case of "guilty until proven innocent."

      Let me put it this way. Do you really believe that Mr. Simpson is "not
guilty" of murder, even tho' the courts found him so? 

      If I purchase LSD, I am guilty of BOTH trafficing and possession,
I _did_ it. After all, you were the one with the "felon" in your .signature. 

Petro, Christopher C.
petro@suba.com <prefered for any non-list stuff>
snow@smoke.suba.com