Quote from: Topazora on Apr 16, 2014, 12:35:51 AM
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 15, 2014, 09:24:25 PM
Quote from: Topazora on Apr 15, 2014, 05:07:24 PM
I don't think civilians should be allowed to carry out justice, as that can get out of hand- and not all cases of rape are actually rape (never know when the chick is lying).
http://37.media.tumblr.com/b641ee6d3ed43bc6e2c4dd7a65079f07/tumblr_mypfjqEJnn1rac79to1_250.gif
way to miss the point, I'm merely saying that its a bad idea allow civilians carry out justice on an accused person. Especially when what usually happens is the accused ends up dying or being damaged for life- and what if they were innocent? Rape doesn't call for death, just being put into the prison and never seeing the light of day again. And have that sentenced carried out by a judicial system that has the resources to investigate the legitimacy of the crime.
I had jury duty about three weeks ago,the case involved A girl who was accusing a man of sexual assault,basically she was saying he touched her inappropriately.She would of been 12 at the time and shes 20 now.The man has a daughter with the mother and was asked to babysit while the mother and her new boyfriend went to a car derby for the weekend.
The accused seemed like a decent bloke,he payed his child support had a good job and would visit his daughter regularly and they lived in the countryside so he would have to travel.The family was kind of weird,mother had kids with multiple men and when she was on the stand she seemed weird laughing smiling all that stuff.For whatever reason the girl who said she was touched comes forward when she is 16 and says he done this,she also changed her statement three times.When questioned on the stand she was very defensive couldn't answer questions etc.
There was no evidence to convict the man,it was her word against his basically,innocent until proven guilty and all that,so we found him not guilty it was the only logical decision 12 of us could come up with.There was 2 people in the jury though that said he was guilty because and I quote "he looks like a dirtbag"and that they ''felt sorry for her'' took us 4 hours to show them how stupid their decision was before they agreed he was not guilty.
Now,he could of done this but there was no evidence to prove without reasonable.the Judge told us that to find a person guilty it has to be of a high standard,you are talking 99% 98%