View Poll Results: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

Voters
38. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, "innocent" would be a welcome addition as an option.

    11 28.95%
  • No, but we should treat "not guilty" as "innocent".

    7 18.42%
  • No, the current system works fine. ('Splain yerself, Lucy)

    18 47.37%
  • Something else.

    2 5.26%
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 104

Thread: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

  1. #81
    ThunderCougarFalconBird
    roughdraft274's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,056

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Why? How would adding "innocent" as an option upset anything?
    Because that is not the purpose of the court. It is not there to show that you definitively prove that you didn't do something. It's there to prove that you did something. Hence the outcomes guilty or not guilty. And if someone is found not guilty in a criminal case, that court shouldn't have the authority to say "and we hereby proclaim that you can't be sued either". If there is a person that wants to sue for damages in court as a civil matter then that is there business. If they can prove there case then that's what they'll do.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    uh that is so small as to be stupid. Do you want registration? given less than 3% of criminals get their guns from private sales, its pretty much a waste of resources
    **Thirty Minutes Later**
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    you are confused. I never denied that many criminals get guns in private sales.

  2. #82
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Everybody loses a trial here and there, but no one wants the losses to stack up. Maybe the possibility of being slapped down with an innocent verdict would cause those prosecutors who have weak evidence to rethink taking it to trial in the first place.
    I seriously doubt it would have much effect on their decisions. They either think they have a case or they don't think they have a case.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  3. #83
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,407

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    I seriously doubt it would have much effect on their decisions. They either think they have a case or they don't think they have a case.
    Again, I'm not so sure.

    There was a big issue here locally just last year where the county DA angered the local police by refusing to take weak cases to court if he felt they were unwinnable. While that might seem to back your point, and to a degree it does, it should also be noted that the police made it a point that previous DAs never thwarted them like that and would just prosecute whatever was sent to them.

    I believe this happens more than we know.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  4. #84
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    We presently have "guilty" and "not guilty" as verdict options. "Not guilty" is often treated as "we still think you're guilty, we just didn't present a good enough case to convict you". Victims and/or their families often follow up a not guilty verdict with a civil lawsuit seeking financial damages, as the level of proof is lower.

    As we have seen with so many exonerations in recent years, factually innocent people get convicted too often, so it stands to reason that there are more that are wrongly accused but beat the rap and are found not guilty... yet the "not guilty" still may face legal battles in the form of civil lawsuits, civil rights violation charges, and so on.

    Should we add a third option of "innocent" for juries and/or judges to consider and use? Because it is now undeniable that factually innocent people are sometimes accused and charged, this would allow juries and/or judges to state, "We see no credible evidence whatsoever that this person is guilty, and as such, deem them to be factually innocent. They are hereby set free, and cannot face any further prosecution whatsoever for this particular crime." This would eliminate civil suits, civil rights violation charges, etc. A person who is deemed innocent shouldn't have to face a never-ending legal gauntlet simply because a family is emotionally upset (albeit understandably, but still...), or the DoJ is grandstanding.

    Would it be perfect? Of course not. Human involvement eliminates any concept of perfection. Would it be an improvement and a step toward fairness (which justice is supposed to be about)? Yes, I believe so.
    I say no the current system is already fine.You are already innocent until you are proven guilty in a court of law.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #85
    Sage
    Phys251's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    12,734

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by shrubnose View Post
    What I am advocating is that we adopt the Scottish system, under which "Not Proven' indicates that although the jury believes the accused to be guilty but there is not enough evidence for a conviction.
    At the risk of derailing this thread, I think that the Martin/Zimmerman case might have made an excellent candidate for a "not proven" verdict.
    "A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man we can trust with nuclear weapons." --Hillary Rodham Clinton
    "Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections." --Mitt Romney

  6. #86
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    At the risk of derailing this thread, I think that the Martin/Zimmerman case might have made an excellent candidate for a "not proven" verdict.



    That was my thought also

  7. #87
    Sage
    mak2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Indiana
    Last Seen
    07-08-16 @ 01:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,050

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    That is really not derailing the thead, the idea of the thread, I thought, was a "superduper, extra special" not guilty verdict for the Z man. Which would have declared him not guilty, innocent, and virgin. I think he plans to turn superhero too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    At the risk of derailing this thread, I think that the Martin/Zimmerman case might have made an excellent candidate for a "not proven" verdict.
    God Bless the Marine Corps.

  8. #88
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Options 2 and 3 are the same. We presume innocence, so if someone is found "not guilty" then, legally, they remain innocent.

    Public opinion is irrelevant and will not change based on a change in the system.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  9. #89
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Across the board, yes. Individuals have the right to bring suit, and then the system is designed to allow other individuals to determine if culpability is present using the civil standards for culpability, rather than the criminal standards for guilt.

    To argue that civil cases should be disallowed due to the results of a criminal suit is to remove the rights of the people. Just because a person has received immunity from criminal prosecution due to their 5th amendment rights does not mean that others should lose their right to present a lawsuit regarding culpability.
    There's a difference between bringing forth a legitimate civil suit and using civil suits to bully.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #90
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Should "innocent" be an option as a verdict in criminal trials?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    There's a difference between bringing forth a legitimate civil suit and using civil suits to bully.
    Of course. But that is neither here nor there with regard to double jeopardy.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •