3 ms·

My point is - is it possible that he is directly responsible for the airplane guy going to prison? Possibly, but we don't know. Presumption of innocence is imp

by terryf 7y ago

My point is - is it possible that he is directly responsible for the airplane guy going to prison? Possibly, but we don't know. Presumption of innocence is important. Example: there's a locally well known actor where I live that was accused of having child porn on his computer a few months ago. The press obviously jumped all over that and he was plastered over all the front pages. Fast forward two months and it's actually looking like he isn't actually guilty and won't be dragged into court. The result for him however is that he's broke, got no more acting gigs and his kids are bullied in school. Bad result. Because people didn't assume he's innocent until PROVEN guilty. I'd be 100% happy to trade off some exec that steals money from a company getting to skip jail for nobody who's innocent ever ending up in jail.

mrtksn 7y ago
This is not a court of law, the public opinion is formed from the info available to us and we form our opinions based on our understanding. This is O.K. because we do not put people in prison. For example, it was O.K. to think that Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos a fraud and express this opinion well before the court decided that. Therefore I think this is not a glorious story of an innocent CEO persecuted by the baddies, I laid out my reasons for that. You are free to think otherwise but if you want to participate in the discussion you are expected to build up your position and defend it. "Let's wait for the court decision" is not a good argument, especially when a subject is a person who runs from a court decision.
- terryf 7y ago
  "For example, it was O.K. to think that Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos a fraud and express this opinion well before the court decided that." That's the part I don't agree with. I don't think it's fair. It's also unlikely that I'll be able to change your mind on this matter or that you'll be able to change mine during the course of a few comments on HN, so we can agree to disagree :)

by terryf 7y ago

mrtksn 7y ago

This is not a court of law, the public opinion is formed from the info available to us and we form our opinions based on our understanding. This is O.K. because we do not put people in prison. For example, it was O.K. to think that Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos a fraud and express this opinion well before the court decided that. Therefore I think this is not a glorious story of an innocent CEO persecuted by the baddies, I laid out my reasons for that. You are free to think otherwise but if you want to participate in the discussion you are expected to build up your position and defend it. "Let's wait for the court decision" is not a good argument, especially when a subject is a person who runs from a court decision.

terryf 7y ago
"For example, it was O.K. to think that Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos a fraud and express this opinion well before the court decided that." That's the part I don't agree with. I don't think it's fair. It's also unlikely that I'll be able to change your mind on this matter or that you'll be able to change mine during the course of a few comments on HN, so we can agree to disagree :)