Re: Good VeloNews Letter



A

Alex Rodriguez

Guest
Yawn. The samples were positive by which set of rules? Not by any
recognizable set. That's the problem. Rules were put in place for a
reason. Unless you follow those rules, you can't call it a positive.
Pretty simple. At least for most.
--------------
Alex
 
Alex Rodriguez wrote:
> Yawn. The samples were positive by which set of rules? Not by any
> recognizable set. That's the problem. Rules were put in place for a
> reason. Unless you follow those rules, you can't call it a positive.
> Pretty simple. At least for most.
> --------------
> Alex


True - you can't call it a positive.
But many people realise that there is a difference between "not guilty"
and "innocent".
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

>True - you can't call it a positive.
>But many people realise that there is a difference between "not guilty"
>and "innocent".


yes, but in the eyes of the law 'not guilty' = 'innoncent' .
-----------------
Alex
 
"Alex Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>True - you can't call it a positive.
>>But many people realise that there is a difference between "not guilty"
>>and "innocent".

>
> yes, but in the eyes of the law 'not guilty' = 'innoncent' .
> -----------------
> Alex


In correct. At law, not guilty simply means that the prosecution failed to
meet its burden of proof. Not guilty has nothing to do with actual
innocence or guilt
 
Alex Rodriguez wrote:
>> yes, but in the eyes of the law 'not guilty' = 'innoncent' .


B. Lafferty wrote:
> In correct. At law, not guilty simply means that the prosecution failed to
> meet its burden of proof. Not guilty has nothing to do with actual
> innocence or guilt


He said innoncent which is a new word to describe people somewhere in the
limbo between innocence and guilt.
 

Similar threads