9 ms·

> Those charges were dropped Dropping charges doesn't mean it's not true, just that the prosecutor did not want to pursue the case, in light of other prosecuti

> Those charges were dropped Dropping charges doesn't mean it's not true, just that the prosecutor did not want to pursue the case, in light of other prosecution available.

bawolff 6y ago
Regardless, we don't punish people on the basis of dropped charges. If he wasn't convicted, then we shouldn't talk about the punishment he deserves to get for those charges.
- FireBeyond 6y ago
  Courts do not. We however can express opinions as we see fit.
  - bawolff 6y ago
    Indeed, "can" and "should" are very different
    - part1of2 6y ago
      We know Kings of England have committed murders. We know dictators have committed atrocities. We know Germany attempted to get Mexico to attack the US. Should we not talk about those things just because they haven’t been tried in court? No, that would be crazy. We should talk about those things because they did happen and there is evidence. And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not?
      - bawolff 6y ago
        > And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not? Not all evidence is created equal and the situation here where there was a functioning fair court system is quite different from situations where there isn't one. There was definitely some irregularities in the investigation, and a possibility of entrapment. Regardless, i don't take issue with talking about it, i just take issue with saying he deserves to be punished for it when the allegations were never proven in court. He should be punished for the things its proven he did, not the things he might have done.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
hndamien 6y ago
I thought we were presumed innocent until proven guilty? Or should I just allege some charges against you?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- shard972 6y ago
  Hey that's your opinion, apparently that's just fine.
- bigwavedave 6y ago
  In truth, that really depends on where you fit into the legal/court system. Spurious allegations can be libelous, so make sure you have the right kind of clout, position, and justification before alleging anything serious, especially if you fall into the "private citizen" camp when making the aforementioned claims.
colinmhayes 6y ago
I didn't realize people were sentenced based off dropped charges?
- reshie 6y ago
  socially guilty or innocent. there are some that all it takes is accusations but legally absolutely.
- KMag 6y ago
  Yes. This should scare us all. Hiring a hitman was both suggested and pushed by someone acting on behalf of the government, and an entrapment defence had better than a 50/50 chance of working, or they wouldn't have dropped charges. Ross is no moral hero, but let's not pretend he was treated fairly or reasonably by law enforcement or the court.

> Those charges were dropped Dropping charges doesn't mean it's not true, just that the prosecutor did not want to pursue the case, in light of other prosecution available.

bawolff 6y ago

Regardless, we don't punish people on the basis of dropped charges. If he wasn't convicted, then we shouldn't talk about the punishment he deserves to get for those charges.

FireBeyond 6y ago
Courts do not. We however can express opinions as we see fit.
- bawolff 6y ago
  Indeed, "can" and "should" are very different
  - part1of2 6y ago
    We know Kings of England have committed murders. We know dictators have committed atrocities. We know Germany attempted to get Mexico to attack the US. Should we not talk about those things just because they haven’t been tried in court? No, that would be crazy. We should talk about those things because they did happen and there is evidence. And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not?
    - bawolff 6y ago
      > And there is evidence in this scenario too, is there not? Not all evidence is created equal and the situation here where there was a functioning fair court system is quite different from situations where there isn't one. There was definitely some irregularities in the investigation, and a possibility of entrapment. Regardless, i don't take issue with talking about it, i just take issue with saying he deserves to be punished for it when the allegations were never proven in court. He should be punished for the things its proven he did, not the things he might have done.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

hndamien 6y ago

I thought we were presumed innocent until proven guilty? Or should I just allege some charges against you?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
shard972 6y ago
Hey that's your opinion, apparently that's just fine.
bigwavedave 6y ago
In truth, that really depends on where you fit into the legal/court system. Spurious allegations can be libelous, so make sure you have the right kind of clout, position, and justification before alleging anything serious, especially if you fall into the "private citizen" camp when making the aforementioned claims.

colinmhayes 6y ago

I didn't realize people were sentenced based off dropped charges?

reshie 6y ago
socially guilty or innocent. there are some that all it takes is accusations but legally absolutely.
KMag 6y ago
Yes. This should scare us all. Hiring a hitman was both suggested and pushed by someone acting on behalf of the government, and an entrapment defence had better than a 50/50 chance of working, or they wouldn't have dropped charges. Ross is no moral hero, but let's not pretend he was treated fairly or reasonably by law enforcement or the court.