I was going with how hard it is to prove a negative. I think it's logically impossible to prove "not" but it's relatively straightforward, if not easy, to prove something is likely true beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, I recall that police live on their close stats. Therefore there's incentive to choose the obvious and easier answer, when it "could" be right.
When I was in law school, the apartments in our building were burglarized in sequence from the first on the first floor through to the second of three on the second floor (we were on the third floor and had installed an antitheft device that would have stopped this particular means of burglary). Turns out the guy who did it (caught red-handed on the third apartment on the second floor) was the guy in the first apartment. A year later (justice in 1978 in Massachusetts!) he was living in an apartment across the street.
But more to your point “presumption of innocence” is only for the jury. It’d be kinda stupid, perhaps criminal, for a prosecutor to assume the defendant innocent.
We in the general public can assume whatever we wish… just shouldn’t act on it, like J6.
Too bad. If he’d have waited a year, he’d have been on some PD where he would have had a long and fruitful career of back-shooting and tasing unarmed traffic violators.
You bet she is
It could in Python 😛
I was going with how hard it is to prove a negative. I think it's logically impossible to prove "not" but it's relatively straightforward, if not easy, to prove something is likely true beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, I recall that police live on their close stats. Therefore there's incentive to choose the obvious and easier answer, when it "could" be right.
Too old
Breitbartland is probably upset he wasn’t an illegal alien, or at least a registered Democrat.
Again, allow me to express my relief that he is not an engineer, for once.
Yes. And.
I am guessing Zodiac is a cop which is why they have not bothered,
My sister went to DeSales University.
When I was in law school, the apartments in our building were burglarized in sequence from the first on the first floor through to the second of three on the second floor (we were on the third floor and had installed an antitheft device that would have stopped this particular means of burglary). Turns out the guy who did it (caught red-handed on the third apartment on the second floor) was the guy in the first apartment. A year later (justice in 1978 in Massachusetts!) he was living in an apartment across the street.
Almost like it was a family trait for the Laundrie's.
They could us Kari Lakes filters?
If he’d been a mathematician, it’d have been years before they caught him.
Explains John Eastman and all the Trump lawyers.
DNA
But more to your point “presumption of innocence” is only for the jury. It’d be kinda stupid, perhaps criminal, for a prosecutor to assume the defendant innocent.
We in the general public can assume whatever we wish… just shouldn’t act on it, like J6.
Cut is the branch that might’ve grown straight…
Too bad. If he’d have waited a year, he’d have been on some PD where he would have had a long and fruitful career of back-shooting and tasing unarmed traffic violators.
Life imitates art, eh Dexter?