Weren’t you paying attention?

“Guilty” people do not go free! “Guilty” people are sentenced and must serve the sentence. Even if they didn’t do the crime!

C’mon now! Be accurate!

Capital cases cost more to try, take longer to appeal, adjudicate, sentence and carry out, and cause frequent miscarriages of justice, wherein innocent people are killed by the state.. .and guilty people go free because juries are reluctant to assess the ultimate penalty.

I won’t en­gage fur­ther with him while he is pound­ing the floor of the sand­box in dis­agree­ment with that distinction.

Again Wrong!!, WRONG!!!!, WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As it is/was Max who continues to pound­ the floor of the sand­box. But he says he will no longer engage. So thankfully, his tedious discussion has now come to an end …

The shame is that many people do not have enough belief in our system to recognize the distinction and the necessity that our Founding Fathers built into it. The necessity that the occasional person who committed the crime will walk, so that the chance that the innocent person will not be convicted will remain strong. Their fear of the essentially unlimited power of the state being brought to bear against the individual is nowhere more evident.

Perhaps shiloh will listen to your point confirming his erroneous statement of “guilty” persons. I won’t engage further with him while he is pounding the floor of the sandbox in disagreement with that distinction.

Let the record show Max does not agree guilty folk beat the rap all the time.

‘nuf said!

“Innocent” means you didn’t do it. “Not guilty” means the standards of evidence or proof or competence have not been met, and this verdict does not necessarily say anything about whether or not you did the crime.

That’s why there is a plea of “not guilty by reason of insanity,” which is not “innocent by reason of insanity” (the latter is not a valid plea, nor a valid verdict).

In MY most polite voice: “Your factual ignorance of our legal system does you no favor and your childish adverse reaction is you needlessly embarrassing yourself. The fact that you compound your original error by very mistakenly noting a “dis­tinc­tion w/​out a dif­fer­ence ” and highlights the ignorance of the VERY DISTINCT DIFFERENCE between innocence, “not guilty” and guilt, under our legal system.”

If you more than your (incorrect) opinion to add to the discussion that can show me to be factually or legally incorrect, you are welcome and I’ll concede.

But you can’t. Perhaps you CAN learn something from Bart.

Better stick with NASCAR.

Yes Vir­ginia, guilty folk beat the rap all the time.

Wrong!!, WRONG!!!!, WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And you KNOW better than to make such a Bartlike statement!

“Guilt” is a LEGAL condition. Everyone is innocent until a judgement of guilt is rendered in a courtroom. The jury also does not declare a defendant “innocent” because they ALREADY ARE INNOCENT. The jury can declare a judgement of “not guilty”.

Now, had you said, “folk who did the crime beat the rap all the time”, you would have been correct.

I am only surprised by the jury not finding guilt on counts 2 and 3 for child abuse and manslaughter. I thought they would bring their beliefs into the deliberation room. But evidently, they took the judge’s charge seriously and to heart.

This is OUR system of justice and I am very proud of it, regardless of if I agree or not.