![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Gary" wrote in message
news:rP1_d.701509$8l.360449@pd7tw1no... [...] I don't want to see a kangaroo style court or a spanish inquisiton but cumon!!!! after 20 years and $200 million I would have thought that this would have been a open and shut case! By definition, a case that takes 20 years and $200 million to try is NOT "open and shut". Furthermore, to insist that the length or cost of a trial should somehow imply a guilty verdict at the end is just stupid. If the length or cost of a trial was in any way an indicator of what the final judgment should be, we could simply set a threshold for time and/or cost and say that any trial that exceeds that threshold will automatically return a guilty verdict. The cost in time and money for a trial reflects the complexity of the case, the seriousness of the offense, and amount of evidence, and similar issues. It's not a metric that's useful for determining guilt or innocence. Basically, your entire premise is just plain dumb. Sorry, no offense intended. It's just that you're not being rational. By the way, it's a well-known established fact of most Western justice systems (Canadas included) that not every guilty party is found guilty in court. Even if the defendents in this case are guilty (and so far you've failed to show you have any reason to believe they are), there is still the possibility that they would *legitimately* be found not guilty. There are good reasons for our justice systems being designed this way, and anyone who expects a 100% conviction rate of guilty parties has simply set themselves up for disappointment. As far as the Mounties "we always get our man" claim, the Mounties don't try the case, and that statement has nothing to do with whether a conviction happens or not. It's not even a legally binding claim, but if it were, it would apply only to the initial criminal investigations and arrests. You're welcome to vent, but don't be surprised when people point out how foolish your venting is. Pete |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... "Gary" wrote in message news:rP1_d.701509$8l.360449@pd7tw1no... [...] I don't want to see a kangaroo style court or a spanish inquisiton but cumon!!!! after 20 years and $200 million I would have thought that this would have been a open and shut case! By definition, a case that takes 20 years and $200 million to try is NOT "open and shut". ....snip... Basically, your entire premise is just plain dumb. Sorry, no offense intended. It's just that you're not being rational. ....snip... By the way, it's a well-known established fact of most Western justice systems (Canadas included) that not every guilty party is found guilty in court. Agreed. The politicians who are lining up to criticize now, conveniently forgot that they were the ones in power for the first 8 years of the investigation. And no doubt the Secret Service may have screwed up, but there are lots of Democratic countries where the Secret Services have been known to screw up :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Night of the bombers - the most daring special mission of Finnishbombers in WW2 | Jukka O. Kauppinen | Military Aviation | 4 | March 22nd 04 11:19 PM |
Why did Britain win the BoB? | Grantland | Military Aviation | 79 | October 15th 03 03:34 PM |
04 Oct 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 4th 03 07:51 PM |
18 Sep 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 19th 03 03:47 AM |