3 ms·
From my very German perspective, the serious problem seems to be that the principle of "in dubio pro reo" > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=In_dubio
by wolfgke 8y ago
From my very German perspective, the serious problem seems to be that the principle of "in dubio pro reo"
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=In_dubio_pro_reo&oldid=859960701 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=In_dubio_pro_reo&...
is not obeyed in the trial. This principle says that a defendant can only be convicted if the evidence is clear that the respective person is guilty. If it is not clear, the defendant is to be let free (or rather: can only be punished for the punishable acts for which the evidence is clear).
As you can see in the Wikipedia article, this principle has been very central in German law for centuries.
- maxerickson 8y agoThe US ostensibly has this standard ("proof beyond a reasonable doubt"). I think the problem is related to trust of institutions and a learned blindness. Various participants in a trial all assume the others are working to ensure the correct outcome and don't make every personal effort to do the same.
- candiodari 8y agoTo be fair, even a cursory examination of how much time and effort they get to put into these cases, they cannot. I remember reading that a judge has, on average, spent 16 minutes or less on convictions for less than 1 year sentence. The state makes it impossible for people to do that, even if they were so inclined in the first place. And, of course, they have to consider that they go against part of their own organization to make this happen (meaning some of your colleagues will want a conviction and you preventing them from getting that will have costs).