CDZ How much evidence is needed to presume guilt?

[flacaltenn]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked.

I disagree. Thats like saying if I accuse you of assaulting me then it has no merit because no third party witnessed it.

Doesn't follow logically. Because if you state time, place, manner and method or have injuries -- that's all stuff that CAN be used to corroborate or discredit the claim. Even with NO witnesses.

Both folks need to be present and not have alibis for instance.

What kind of assault leaves no evidence whatsoever? Not many.

File a police report within a couple hours of the assault and leave a record of it. If you don't DO that -- must not have been worthy..

 

[Asclepias]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked.

I disagree. Thats like saying if I accuse you of assaulting me then it has no merit because no third party witnessed it.

Doesn't follow logically. Because if you state time, place, manner and method or have injuries -- that's all stuff that CAN be used to corroborate or discredit the claim. Even with NO witnesses.

Both folks need to be present and not have alibis for instance.

What kind of assault leaves no evidence whatsoever? Not many.

File a police report within a couple hours of the assault and leave a record of it. If you don't DO that -- must not have been worthy..

Of course it follows logically. Its happened too many times to count just here in the US. You can be setup and be in the place at the time the person claims the crime happened. Again please explain the people that have been imprisoned and they were not even at the place the crime was alleged to have happened? They had alibis and were still imprisoned. Just admit that merit is a judgement call and not based on evidence.

 

[Muhammed]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

 

[Asclepias]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

 

[Muhammed]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

You are dodging the question.

Why are you dodging the question?

 

[Asclepias]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

You are dodging the question.

Why are you dodging the question?

Cause its a stupid question.

 

[Muhammed]

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

You are dodging the question.

Why are you dodging the question?

Cause its a stupid question.

So, do you think Trump hates black people? If so, why?

 

[Asclepias]

Absolutely.

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

You are dodging the question.

Why are you dodging the question?

Cause its a stupid question.

So, do you think Trump hates black people? If so, why?

Not sure what that has to do with the OP? Can you elaborate?

 

[flacaltenn]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked.

I disagree. Thats like saying if I accuse you of assaulting me then it has no merit because no third party witnessed it.

Doesn't follow logically. Because if you state time, place, manner and method or have injuries -- that's all stuff that CAN be used to corroborate or discredit the claim. Even with NO witnesses.

Both folks need to be present and not have alibis for instance.

What kind of assault leaves no evidence whatsoever? Not many.

File a police report within a couple hours of the assault and leave a record of it. If you don't DO that -- must not have been worthy..

Of course it follows logically. Its happened too many times to count just here in the US. You can be setup and be in the place at the time the person claims the crime happened. Again please explain the people that have been imprisoned and they were not even at the place the crime was alleged to have happened? They had alibis and were still imprisoned. Just admit that merit is a judgement call and not based on evidence.

THere are alibis, and there are credible alibis. So just claiming that justice was vacated on the basis that one was OFFERED is another example of pursuing the truth of ANY ASSERTION made as evidence.

At the LEAST -- you have to document time, place, description of the attacker AS A MINIMUM. What were they wearing? Description of any weapon. Even in the ABSENCE of any witnesses, a LOT can be done to establish truth. If it's serious enough, your CELL PHONEs will place both of you there.

Always ways of corroborating or dismissing evidence.

 

[Asclepias]

You cant presume guilt. You can only say someones accusations have merit.

Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked.

I disagree. Thats like saying if I accuse you of assaulting me then it has no merit because no third party witnessed it.

Doesn't follow logically. Because if you state time, place, manner and method or have injuries -- that's all stuff that CAN be used to corroborate or discredit the claim. Even with NO witnesses.

Both folks need to be present and not have alibis for instance.

What kind of assault leaves no evidence whatsoever? Not many.

File a police report within a couple hours of the assault and leave a record of it. If you don't DO that -- must not have been worthy..

Of course it follows logically. Its happened too many times to count just here in the US. You can be setup and be in the place at the time the person claims the crime happened. Again please explain the people that have been imprisoned and they were not even at the place the crime was alleged to have happened? They had alibis and were still imprisoned. Just admit that merit is a judgement call and not based on evidence.

THere are alibis, and there are credible alibis. So just claiming that justice was vacated on the basis that one was OFFERED is another example of pursuing the truth of ANY ASSERTION made as evidence.

At the LEAST -- you have to document time, place, description of the attacker AS A MINIMUM. What were they wearing? Description of any weapon. Even in the ABSENCE of any witnesses, a LOT can be done to establish truth. If it's serious enough, your CELL PHONEs will place both of you there.

Always ways of corroborating or dismissing evidence.

Who decides if the alibi is credible and what do they base it on? This is exactly where you logic falls down and gets a bloody nose. Its merely a judgement call and the primary reason people go to prison unjustly.

 

[Muhammed]

Are you sure that isn't your TDS talking?

Are you sure that isnt your Drumpfsexual feelings talking?

You are dodging the question.

Why are you dodging the question?

Cause its a stupid question.

So, do you think Trump hates black people? If so, why?

Not sure what that has to do with the OP? Can you elaborate?

Sure, if you think Trump hates all black people despite a lack of any evidence whatsoever, then you likely suffer from TDS.

And if you do indeed suffer from TDS, it could skew your judgement regarding his pick for SCOTUS.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Does Ford's accusation have merit?

None at all

 

[Leo123]

That deflection is besides the point. You claimed merit needs evidence. If thats true why are people in prison right now even though there is zero evidence they committed a crime?

Ok then, why is Kavanaugh 'guilty' on Ford's 'say so?' Why is Ford walking free after accusing an innocent man with 0 evidence? WTF is your point? BTW I never said 'merit needs evidence' stop lying about what I wrote please.

 

[Asclepias]

That deflection is besides the point. You claimed merit needs evidence. If thats true why are people in prison right now even though there is zero evidence they committed a crime?

Ok then, why is Kavanaugh 'guilty' on Ford's 'say so?' Why is Ford walking free after accusing an innocent man with 0 evidence? WTF is your point? BTW I never said 'merit needs evidence' stop lying about what I wrote please.

Who told you Kav was guilty on Fords say so?

You dont get put in prison for making an accusation. In order to suffer penalties one has to prove she was lying. My point is that there is never a presumption of guilt. There is only a presumption of merit as in regards to the accusations

Actually you did say merit needs evidence.....Thats why I said you were wrong. Your words not mine.

CDZ - How much evidence is needed to presume guilt?

"Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked."

 

[Leo123]

That deflection is besides the point. You claimed merit needs evidence. If thats true why are people in prison right now even though there is zero evidence they committed a crime?

Ok then, why is Kavanaugh 'guilty' on Ford's 'say so?' Why is Ford walking free after accusing an innocent man with 0 evidence? WTF is your point? BTW I never said 'merit needs evidence' stop lying about what I wrote please.

Who told you Kav was guilty on Fords say so?

You dont get put in prison for making an accusation. In order to suffer penalties one has to prove she was lying. My point is that there is never a presumption of guilt. There is only a presumption of merit as in regards to the accusations

Actually you did say merit needs evidence.....Thats why I said you were wrong. Your words not mine.

CDZ - How much evidence is needed to presume guilt?

"Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked."

Actually I said accusations need evidence otherwise they don't have merit. I said nothing about 'presumption of merit' that is your interpretation. The legal term, BTW, is presumption of INNOCENCE which is what Democrats and the MSM did not afford to Mr. K in their desperation to keep him off the SCOTUS bench by character assassination. I hope someone investigates Ford an her lefty lawyer as well as Feinstein.

There is no reason to believe that an accusation equals guilt. You should know this.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Limitation Of Statutes "

* Character Of Behavior *

The burden of proof in a criminal prosecution stipulates beyond a reasonable doubt .

The burden of proof in a civil tort stipulates a preponderance of the evidence .

The criteria for evaluating the character of a supreme court candidate is not strictly bound to criminal behavior .

Would ford's accusations satisfying a preponderance of the evidence of a sexual assault be sufficient ?

 

[Asclepias]

That deflection is besides the point. You claimed merit needs evidence. If thats true why are people in prison right now even though there is zero evidence they committed a crime?

Ok then, why is Kavanaugh 'guilty' on Ford's 'say so?' Why is Ford walking free after accusing an innocent man with 0 evidence? WTF is your point? BTW I never said 'merit needs evidence' stop lying about what I wrote please.

Who told you Kav was guilty on Fords say so?

You dont get put in prison for making an accusation. In order to suffer penalties one has to prove she was lying. My point is that there is never a presumption of guilt. There is only a presumption of merit as in regards to the accusations

Actually you did say merit needs evidence.....Thats why I said you were wrong. Your words not mine.

CDZ - How much evidence is needed to presume guilt?

"Accusations don't have merit until proven with actual evidence which Ford's accusations lacked."

Actually I said accusations need evidence otherwise they don't have merit. I said nothing about 'presumption of merit' that is your interpretation. The legal term, BTW, is presumption of INNOCENCE which is what Democrats and the MSM did not afford to Mr. K in their desperation to keep him off the SCOTUS bench by character assassination. I hope someone investigates Ford an her lefty lawyer as well as Feinstein.

There is no reason to believe that an accusation equals guilt. You should know this.

Thats pretty much the same thing I said except I reject that notion. An accusation by definition is unproven. You can make accusations all day but that doesnt mean they have any evidence. Since this instance with Kav had nothing to do with a court case there was no presumption of innocence that should have been afforded. Quite the contrary. When you go for a job interview there is no presumption you can do the job (innocence). You have to prove you can do the job to the satisfaction of the person hiring you.

Again for the hard of reading comprehension. I never said accusation equals quilt. I said its a matter of merit. Do the claims have merit? This is a judgement call that requires zero evidence.

 

[Leo123]

Thats pretty much the same thing I said except I reject that notion. An accusation by definition is unproven. You can make accusations all day but that doesnt mean they have any evidence. Since this instance with Kav had nothing to do with a court case there was no presumption of innocence that should have been afforded. Quite the contrary. When you go for a job interview there is no presumption you can do the job (innocence). You have to prove you can do the job to the satisfaction of the person hiring you.

Again for the hard of reading comprehension. I never said accusation equals quilt. I said its a matter of merit. Do the claims have merit? This is a judgement call that requires zero evidence.

Ford's claims have 0 'merit'......And now, behold yet another new Democrat talking point. ^^^^^^ BTW his judicial record shows he can do the job and 6 FBI investigations uphold that fact.

 

[Leo123]

Would ford's accusations satisfying a preponderance of the evidence of a sexual assault be sufficient ?

No, she presented 0 'preponderance of evidence' to claim she was assaulted by Kavenaugh.

 

[Leo123]

You know what is really funny....Kavenaugh is NOT a strict conservative in the first place. This is nothing more than a Democrat attempt to influence the mid-terms in their desperate attempt to impeach Trump. I think they shot themselves in the foot.