nonpareil
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2009
- Messages
- 3,108
- Reaction score
- 743
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The State does not have a vested interest in justice when it challenges their grip on society. Being convicted is not proof of anything. On a point of law it is clear that his intent must be to pass off the currency as legal tender. Saying explicitly that your currency is not legal tender and is just a voluntary barter currency clearly indicates that this was not the intent. Anyone looking at the side of the coin with the money amount specified would find clearly distinguishing features that demonstrate it is not government-issued currency. That side of the coin looks nothing like any government coin I can find.
Being convicted proves that the jury found him guilty. The state is not trusted to convict people in such cases, that's why we have jury trails. So the state petitioned the jury to convict him by presenting their case, and the defendent did the same. The jury found the state's case more convincing - as do most people who responded to this thread.