9 ms·

That's what court cases are about, and why we don't declare innocent or guilty before the verdict. The evidence (or lack of) will come up during the court proce

That's what court cases are about, and why we don't declare innocent or guilty before the verdict. The evidence (or lack of) will come up during the court proceedings, you'd expect.

workinthehead 8y ago
Semantic nitpick, we don't declare innocence, but only that guilt was not proven.
- sametmax 8y ago
  Not a nitpick, pretty fundamental IMO. This should be repeated over and over. People forget it every day.
- adanto6840 8y ago
  As far as I'm aware or have ever been taught, they're one in the same -- "presumption of innocence until proven guilty".
  - workinthehead 8y ago
    Nope, your quote is irrelevant, and it's "one and the same" besides. Why do you think people are pronounced "guilty" or "not guilty"?
    - coding123 8y ago
      In a civil suit there is no guilty party. There may be a liable party.
      - workinthehead 8y ago
        We aren't talking about civil suits though, are we?
        coding123 8y ago
        Unless you're talking about something else, a lawsuit is a civil suit, at least in the united states.
        workinthehead 8y ago
        You're the only one here talking about civil suits. The rest of us were having a fairly intelligent conversation about guilty verdicts. I suggest you read more closely before you contribute next time.
    - Retric 8y ago
      Actually, because you can't be retried for the same crime you are in a very meaningful way declared though not found innocent. A hung trial is closer in meaning to not being found guilty or innocent. Arguably, a semantic difference does apply in that you may still be found liable in a civil case. However, civil cases don't declare people guilty only liable.
      - workinthehead 8y ago
        That's just your opinion, and given you're not even a lawyer, it's worth about as much as the latest Ethereum ICO.
  - stordoff 8y ago
    They are not one and the same - there is still the _presumption_ of innocence when being found not guilty. Not guilty means that you were not _proven_ to be guilty, not that you have been proven to be innocent. You are equally not guilty even if it's pretty clear you did it but there is not quite enough prove, or if proven you didn't do it. You are free from liability under the law, but you are not necessarily factually innocent. Incidentally, this is largely why Scots law verdicts of acquittal -- "not guilty" and "not proven" -- reflecting the two standards of not guilty. "Not proven" carries the implication that the jury is not convinced of the defendant's innocent, but there is not enough evidence for conviction.
    - gowld 8y ago
      "there is still the _presumption_ of innocence" means that the law treats the accused as innocent, with an extra protection that re-trial is more restricted.
      - stordoff 8y ago
        That's roughly what I'm saying - the law treats the accused as innocent, but it does not mean this person is _proven_ innocent. Legally, they are innocent, but there is no declaration made on whether the person is _factually_ innocent or not.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

That's what court cases are about, and why we don't declare innocent or guilty before the verdict. The evidence (or lack of) will come up during the court proceedings, you'd expect.

workinthehead 8y ago

Semantic nitpick, we don't declare innocence, but only that guilt was not proven.

sametmax 8y ago
Not a nitpick, pretty fundamental IMO. This should be repeated over and over. People forget it every day.
adanto6840 8y ago
As far as I'm aware or have ever been taught, they're one in the same -- "presumption of innocence until proven guilty".
- workinthehead 8y ago
  Nope, your quote is irrelevant, and it's "one and the same" besides. Why do you think people are pronounced "guilty" or "not guilty"?
  - coding123 8y ago
    In a civil suit there is no guilty party. There may be a liable party.
    - workinthehead 8y ago
      We aren't talking about civil suits though, are we?
      - coding123 8y ago
        Unless you're talking about something else, a lawsuit is a civil suit, at least in the united states.
        workinthehead 8y ago
        You're the only one here talking about civil suits. The rest of us were having a fairly intelligent conversation about guilty verdicts. I suggest you read more closely before you contribute next time.
  - Retric 8y ago
    Actually, because you can't be retried for the same crime you are in a very meaningful way declared though not found innocent. A hung trial is closer in meaning to not being found guilty or innocent. Arguably, a semantic difference does apply in that you may still be found liable in a civil case. However, civil cases don't declare people guilty only liable.
    - workinthehead 8y ago
      That's just your opinion, and given you're not even a lawyer, it's worth about as much as the latest Ethereum ICO.
- stordoff 8y ago
  They are not one and the same - there is still the _presumption_ of innocence when being found not guilty. Not guilty means that you were not _proven_ to be guilty, not that you have been proven to be innocent. You are equally not guilty even if it's pretty clear you did it but there is not quite enough prove, or if proven you didn't do it. You are free from liability under the law, but you are not necessarily factually innocent. Incidentally, this is largely why Scots law verdicts of acquittal -- "not guilty" and "not proven" -- reflecting the two standards of not guilty. "Not proven" carries the implication that the jury is not convinced of the defendant's innocent, but there is not enough evidence for conviction.
  - gowld 8y ago
    "there is still the _presumption_ of innocence" means that the law treats the accused as innocent, with an extra protection that re-trial is more restricted.
    - stordoff 8y ago
      That's roughly what I'm saying - the law treats the accused as innocent, but it does not mean this person is _proven_ innocent. Legally, they are innocent, but there is no declaration made on whether the person is _factually_ innocent or not.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]