Skip to main content

View Diary: Watch Julian Assange Vaporize TIME's Credibility in ABC - Stephanopoulos 'Grilling' - LOL! (199 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're entering into the realm of insanity. (0+ / 0-)

    Let's look at the whole statement.

    If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty.

        However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.

    In the first paragraph the threshold has already been established, if there's a reasonable doubt it was self-defense - not guilty.

    Now you argue that in the second paragraph, because he only said "convinced" of guilt, that it's implied to be less than beyond a reasonable doubt.

    How can the threshold simultaneously be innocent if there's a reasonable doubt it was self-defense, but at the same time guilty if they're persuaded to any level less than beyond a reasonable doubt? It's impossible.

    That's like saying, "if there's a 2% chance it was self-defense you must find the defendant not guilty, but if you're 51% convinced it was not self-defense you find him guilty.

    Please proceed, Governor.

    by USArmyParatrooper on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 04:37:10 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (132)
  • Community (63)
  • 2016 (46)
  • Elections (38)
  • Media (35)
  • Environment (35)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (33)
  • Republicans (31)
  • Hillary Clinton (30)
  • Law (28)
  • Barack Obama (28)
  • Iraq (27)
  • Civil Rights (25)
  • Climate Change (24)
  • Jeb Bush (24)
  • Culture (24)
  • Economy (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Bernie Sanders (18)
  • Senate (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site