• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Homeowner Who Shot And Killed A Girl On His Porch Found Guilty Of Murder[W:56]

This is what I was responding too.
Which was in response to this. Which you already know.
It's about innocence or guilt before you have to pay or not. And OJ was found guilty by a jury.

And it simply is not about guilt. That is reserved for criminal trials.
It is about responsibility by preponderance of the evidence.
A low standard of proof.
 
Which was in response to this. Which you already know.

And it simply is not about guilt. That is reserved for criminal trials.
It is about responsibility by preponderance of the evidence.
A low standard of proof.


guilt
noun \ˈgilt\

: responsibility for a crime or for doing something bad or wrong --- my words (as in not fulfilling your contract)

: a bad feeling caused by knowing or thinking that you have done something bad or wrong
Full Definition of GUILT
1
: the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly : guilty conduct
2
a : the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously
b : feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy : self-reproach
3
: a feeling of culpability for offenses
See guilt defined for English-language learners »
See guilt defined for kids »
Examples of GUILT

The jury determines the defendant's guilt or innocence.
His guilt in the matter was indisputable.
It was clear that the guilt lay with him.
a strong sense of guilt
She feels guilt over something that happened before she was born!
our secret guilts and insecurities

Origin of GUILT
Middle English, delinquency, guilt, from Old English gylt delinquency
First Known Use: before 12th century
Related to GUILT

Synonyms
contriteness, contrition, penitence, regret, remorse, remorsefulness, repentance, rue, self-reproach, shame

Antonyms
impenitence, remorselessness

[+]more
 
guilt
noun \ˈgilt\

: responsibility for a crime or for doing something bad or wrong --- my words (as in not fulfilling your contract)

: a bad feeling caused by knowing or thinking that you have done something bad or wrong
Full Definition of GUILT
1
: the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly : guilty conduct
2
a : the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously
b : feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy : self-reproach
3
: a feeling of culpability for offenses
See guilt defined for English-language learners »
See guilt defined for kids »
Examples of GUILT

The jury determines the defendant's guilt or innocence.
His guilt in the matter was indisputable.
It was clear that the guilt lay with him.
a strong sense of guilt
She feels guilt over something that happened before she was born!
our secret guilts and insecurities

Origin of GUILT
Middle English, delinquency, guilt, from Old English gylt delinquency
First Known Use: before 12th century
Related to GUILT

Synonyms
contriteness, contrition, penitence, regret, remorse, remorsefulness, repentance, rue, self-reproach, shame

Antonyms
impenitence, remorselessness

[+]more

:doh

Civil trials are about responsibility.
 
Yeah, and if you are found responsible you are guilty of not fulling your responsibility.

Read the damn definition
:doh
Not the same thing

Not guilt, liability.
 
I see you are having a hard time understanding the dictionary
iLOL :doh Not at all.

You are having a hard time distinguishing the difference between civil proceedings and a criminal trial and the type of results that come from such.

You think OJ was found guilty of killing when he clearly was not.
Your position is absurd.
 
iLOL :doh Not at all.

You are having a hard time distinguishing the difference between civil proceedings and a criminal trial and the type of results that come from such.

You think OJ was found guilty of killing when he clearly was not.
Your position is absurd.

If you call home and say you will be home at 5 PM, but instead you go to the bar and have a few thus you get home at 9 PM are you guilty of being late?
 
If you call home and say you will be on at 5 PM, but instead you go to the bar and have a few thus you get home at 9 PM are you guilty of being late?
Still having trouble distinguishing between civil proceedings and a criminal trial and the type of results that come from such, huh? Go figure .
 
Still having trouble distinguishing between civil proceedings and a criminal trial and the type of results that come from such, huh? Go figure .

Boy you ran from that one. I knew you could not answer that one. Next time bone up a little before you jump in.
 
Boy you ran from that one. I knew you could not answer that one. Next time bone up a little before you jump in.
No. I did not run. You are using guilt in a general sense. Not the legal sense of criminal vs civil.

If you would stay relevant you would likely see where you are wrong.
 
Homeowner Who Shot And Killed A Girl On His Porch Found Guilty Of Murder | ThinkProgress

The Detroit-area homeowner who shot in the head 19-year-old Renisha McBride was found guilty of murder Thursday afternoon. The jury found him guilty on all three charges — second-degree murder, manslaughter, and felony firearm — on its second day of deliberations.

.....Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy said her office determined that Wafer “did not act in lawful self-defense.”

During the trial, prosecutors probed Wafer’s inconsistent testimony on whether he intended to fire, and questioned why, if he was shooting in fear for his life, he put his gun down by the front door. They also called upon jurors in closing arguments to consider why he didn’t make a more vigorous effort to call the police before turning to his gun, rather than making himself “judge, jury, and executioner.”


I think this is justice served.

the guy was an idiot.

in self defense,with stand your ground,you have to be in imminent danger,with the castle doctrine,it varies by state,but most states with those laws require immediate threat on your home and property or rented property,and usually require if not in immediate danger a demand for the person to retreat,in which if someone broke in your house,you point a gun at them and tell them leave or else,and they turn around and run,it would be illegal to shoot them.castle doctrine laws vary by state.

overall the guy was an idiot,in the fact his story consistenly changed.he is about as stupid as that guy from texas who shot his neighbor citing a stand your ground law,in which texas didnt have.
 
in the fact his story consistenly changed.
Please point out where his story consistently changed.
And the number of times it has changed for you to label it consistently changed.
 
Please point out where his story consistently changed.
And the number of times it has changed for you to label it consistently changed.

im going by the article,which points out his story had changed.
 
Please point out where his story consistently changed.
And the number of times it has changed for you to label it consistently changed.
im going by the article,which points out his story had changed.
That in no way means or shows "consistent" change as you claimed.
So you were speaking nonsense.

One change.
From accidental, to purposely pulling the trigger.

Which I certainly have recognized got him found guilty.
 
Yep the vast majority of people called these one a long times ago when it first happened.
Very easy case, not sure if there was any NEW stuff during the trial but everything that cam out before hand pointed to a bad shoot, negligence and types of charges definitely being filed and him being found guilty.

There was nothing support self defense in the case.

I recognize that far more people saw the abuse of the SYG laws and that blatant disregard this guy exhibited for this little girl's life in what he chose to do. I think the what this story illustrates best is the risks that are posed when the laws are poorly written and/or misunderstood. That risk being people feeling empowered to make life and death decisions on a whim.
 
I recognize that far more people saw the abuse of the SYG laws and that blatant disregard this guy exhibited for this little girl's life in what he chose to do. I think the what this story illustrates best is the risks that are posed when the laws are poorly written and/or misunderstood. That risk being people feeling empowered to make life and death decisions on a whim.

hmmmm. i dont disagree on premise at all. I in fact dispise the poorly written laws and this one would be more castle doctrine, not SYG even though many talked about SYG during this case. Regardless though i dont think thats what THIS story does because i just think the guy was an idiot I dont think he was confused. But im sure there are cases out there where people were confused.
 
Back
Top Bottom