2 ms·

> A pardon absolves one of the sin as if it didn't happen, legally. This is incorrect. A pardon is not an expungement. The conviction remains a usable historic

> A pardon absolves one of the sin as if it didn't happen, legally. This is incorrect. A pardon is not an expungement. The conviction remains a usable historical fact and could still be referenced in later legal procedings. Exact ramifications vary between innocence-based pardons, rehabilitiation-based pardons, and pure discretionary clemency.

cogman10 3mo ago
In fact, part of accepting a pardon is accepting guilt. That can particularly be consequential if there is a civil case associated with the criminal charges. For example, if I'm charged with drunk driving and I run into someone's house, by accepting a pardon I have to admit that I'm guilty of drunk driving which the home owner can then use in their civil suit to extra money for the damage I caused. This is part of the reason why people will sometimes not accept a pardon.
- rootusrootus 3mo ago
  > part of accepting a pardon is accepting guilt Is that not a commonly misunderstood myth? You do not have to sign anything admitting guilt.
  - 8note 3mo ago
    https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-7/ALDE_00013324/&ved=2ahUKEwjUwIH-nq-VAxX6CTQIHdSXMdAQFnoECCQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Ym4d8InqXmoHOeyOMzqE8 https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3... different courts have said different things. the more recent courts have said it only removes the punishment you were still found guilty, so the guilt is still there
    - cogman10 3mo ago
      There's also a weird play with the prosecution. Like if a pardon is issued before trial, under normal circumstances the prosecutor will drop charges and the pardonee does not need to accept it. Further, a prosecutor won't go after charges when someone is pardoned. These are the cases where a pardon wouldn't imply guilt. But generally speaking, pardons happen after a conviction and not before. Accepting a pardon ends appeals.
    - rootusrootus 3mo ago
      That link breaks for me, but I suspect I know what you are referring to. That talk from the various courts seems mostly like rhetoric more than an establishment of legal precedent. It is all implied meaning, since indeed you do not need to affirmatively proclaim your own guilt in order to accept a pardon. You can just accept delivery and be done with it. Whether someone else imputes guilt from that is [mostly] their problem.
- cassepipe 3mo ago
  IIRC it is why some people defending captain Dreyfus urged him not to accept a pardon
dylan604 3mo ago
I think you're missing the point. If you are a felon, there is baggage that comes with it which varies depending on the state. Some felons can no longer vote or legally own a firearm. Some felons find it hard to find a place to rent. Unless of course, you've been pardoned. I also even stipulated that people could not be made to forget about it. Yet, you then reiterate that after telling me I was incorrect.

cogman10 3mo ago

In fact, part of accepting a pardon is accepting guilt. That can particularly be consequential if there is a civil case associated with the criminal charges. For example, if I'm charged with drunk driving and I run into someone's house, by accepting a pardon I have to admit that I'm guilty of drunk driving which the home owner can then use in their civil suit to extra money for the damage I caused. This is part of the reason why people will sometimes not accept a pardon.

rootusrootus 3mo ago
> part of accepting a pardon is accepting guilt Is that not a commonly misunderstood myth? You do not have to sign anything admitting guilt.
- 8note 3mo ago
  https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3-7/ALDE_00013324/&ved=2ahUKEwjUwIH-nq-VAxX6CTQIHdSXMdAQFnoECCQQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Ym4d8InqXmoHOeyOMzqE8 https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-3... different courts have said different things. the more recent courts have said it only removes the punishment you were still found guilty, so the guilt is still there
  - cogman10 3mo ago
    There's also a weird play with the prosecution. Like if a pardon is issued before trial, under normal circumstances the prosecutor will drop charges and the pardonee does not need to accept it. Further, a prosecutor won't go after charges when someone is pardoned. These are the cases where a pardon wouldn't imply guilt. But generally speaking, pardons happen after a conviction and not before. Accepting a pardon ends appeals.
  - rootusrootus 3mo ago
    That link breaks for me, but I suspect I know what you are referring to. That talk from the various courts seems mostly like rhetoric more than an establishment of legal precedent. It is all implied meaning, since indeed you do not need to affirmatively proclaim your own guilt in order to accept a pardon. You can just accept delivery and be done with it. Whether someone else imputes guilt from that is [mostly] their problem.
cassepipe 3mo ago
IIRC it is why some people defending captain Dreyfus urged him not to accept a pardon

dylan604 3mo ago

I think you're missing the point. If you are a felon, there is baggage that comes with it which varies depending on the state. Some felons can no longer vote or legally own a firearm. Some felons find it hard to find a place to rent. Unless of course, you've been pardoned. I also even stipulated that people could not be made to forget about it. Yet, you then reiterate that after telling me I was incorrect.