←back to thread

849 points dvektor | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
bjorkandkd[dead post] ◴[] No.44289491[source]
[flagged]
eddieroger ◴[] No.44289564[source]
From your link:

> The defendant, Preston Thorpe, appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled drug with intent to sell

He may have done other things, but his conviction was for possession with intent, and that seems to be why he's locked up. It doesn't make anything else he's done acceptable, but in America he's innocent until proven guilty, and it doesn't seem he was found guilty of assault.

replies(7): >>44289660 #>>44289668 #>>44289818 #>>44289828 #>>44289842 #>>44289845 #>>44290017 #
abxyz ◴[] No.44289660[source]
> ...in America he's innocent until proven guilty...

...in a court of law. Innocent until proven guilty doesn't extend to internet comments.

replies(1): >>44289686 #
qualeed ◴[] No.44289686[source]
>Innocent until proven guilty doesn't extend to internet comments.

That's not a good thing.

Edit: I cannot really believe that this, of all comments, is controversial. Living life treating everyone as guilty until they prove themselves innocent is... just shitty, let alone exhausting. Do people forget about how many times reddit and other ruined innocent people's lives?

Sometimes HN amazes me with new technology, interesting conversations, etc. Sometimes it amazes me when people are arguing that we should go through life treating people as guilty first, until they are proven innocent. I think I'll go back to not participating for awhile.

replies(6): >>44289712 #>>44289825 #>>44289963 #>>44290003 #>>44290074 #>>44293296 #
camjw ◴[] No.44289963[source]
The point is that people should be able to use their own judgement on a wide variety of issues and not be forced to delegate their decision making power to the courts/third parties.

There's a difference between "we want to lock this person up and take away their liberty, so we should be basically certain" versus "look man he's been done for drugs and she ended up with a broken arm, I don't trust this person".

replies(1): >>44289973 #
qualeed ◴[] No.44289973[source]
>not be forced to delegate their decision making power to the courts/third parties.

That's not close to what I was saying, and I don't know how people are interpreting it this way.

replies(1): >>44290294 #
1. camjw ◴[] No.44290294[source]
That is the point of saying "innocent until proven guilty"? Who does the proving? How can it not be interpreted in this way?