Re: Reason 34 to despise the police

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 10:41:16 +0100, "mert1639"
<mert1639@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Yes, if bus drivers are being convicted for freak accidents. Of course,
there is a chance that the accident was a combination of fault between the
bus driver and other parties. Just as in the case of cash the officer's
error may be compounded by lack of co-operation by the suspect.

The onus is upon the police to show guilt, not the accused to prove
innocence. The police and their apologists are always forgetting that
one basic fact - a fact that is the very cornerstone of our criminal
justice system.

"This person has some money, we don't know where it came from and he
won't tell us.," is *not* evidence of guilt by any stretch of the
imagination.

That would make them far less likely to seize
cash, which may well benefit criminals.

No, it would simply make the police more careful about ensuring that
the money they seize is *really* the proceeds of crime before they
seize it, instead of having a "shoot first, ask questions later"
approach. The major benefit would be to innocent people.

I don't think they have such a policy.

Any system wherein the people are not at risk of being punished for
mistakes *will* develop such a policy. It is simple psychology.

--
Cynic


.

Relevant Pages