Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 23, 2017, 02:39:47 PM
75132 Posts in 1768 Topics by 359 Members
Latest Member: nic4real
Home Help Login Register
TalkLeft Discussion Forums  |  Topics  |  Crimes 'R Us: Crimes in the News  |  Wrongful Convictions and Unjust Accusations  |  Common Sense vs Presumption of Innocence 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Common Sense vs Presumption of Innocence  (Read 3373 times)
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 1377

Common Sense vs Presumption of Innocence
« on: July 25, 2007, 11:59:54 AM »

  Thought this was an interesting article covering 3 cases and a runner. At what point does common sense trump presumption of innocence?


Bob In Pacifica
Hero Member
Offline Offline

Posts: 4204

Re: Common Sense vs Presumption of Innocence
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2007, 08:53:27 AM »

I think the bottom line, that people wait for the evidence, is not such a bad position, but people aren't constrained from discussing what is in the public forum. I see the problem as the leaps of logic people take when their emotions on a case take over from what they know.

For ex, Barry Bonds probably did use steroids. Probably 25 to 50% of major leaguers did it (used steroids) during the high water mark of that period. Are we going to throw out half the records of baseball? Throw out the records of teams who had presumed steroid users on their team? Award wins to bad teams without alleged steroid takers who lost to teams that included alleged steroid takers. Ken Caminiti admitted to using steroids during the year he won the NL's MVP. As well as drinking too much, using cocaine and opiates. So why doesn't anyone want to throw out his 1996 records? Caminiti was unanimously chosen MVP. Why hasn't there been a major movement by sportswriters to retract that award? Where's the dander when there's an admission?

I don't expect the NBA to go back and replay the games where their dirty ref was officiating.

It's just impossible to do it. To restore the "integrity" of baseball you have to destroy the records.

I think that one problem is that there are parallel "courts" involved in these scandals. Whether or not Michael Vick is convicted the NFL seems to have a right through its labor contract to keep him from playing until it all gets sorted out. Whether or not Barry Bonds lied to a grand jury is not necessarily going to affect his records in baseball.

For those people who are upset about the feds not paying any attention to the lacrosse case and the violations of law there, rest assured that the grand juries out here in San Francisco have been pondering whether or not Bonds perjured himself in 2003. Four years.
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Advertise Here