3 ms·
Supreme court or a local mobile court, all function based on evidence. And evidence can be tampered. And dont tell me in India people dont say "If he has money/
by anaganisk 4y ago
Supreme court or a local mobile court, all function based on evidence. And evidence can be tampered.
And dont tell me in India people dont say "If he has money/power he will be free".
Courts dont investigate. They listen to what prosecution has to provide, if prosecustion has new evidence decades later, the acquital can be oveturned. Doesnt mean someone is innocent forever. Its not a certificate of innocence.
- nocababges 4y agoSo you will trust BBC propaganda more than Supreme Court. right on.
- anaganisk 4y agoYou do realise that you are literally turning gears in your head to come up with some witty line but end up justifying my comment yourself without even trying to understand what I said. If the BBC documentary can provide new evidence or some common person comes up with new evidence, they can literally repoen the case, and who knows may be the accusations may be found with a guilty verdict. There are several cases that have been re-opened, and verdicts reversed decades later. Supreme court giving a clean chit doesn't mean a permanent certificate of innocence. It just means evidence was not strong by prosecution during the trial.