"Tom Kunich" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
> "Jonathan v.d. Sluis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "Jazzman" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news
[email protected]:
>>
>>> I'm not sure about Spain, but in France, Napoleonic law prevails,
>>> which says exactly that: "Guilty until proven innocent."
>>
>> The napoleonic code is the basis of my country's system of law, but we
>> don't presume people guilty. But then again, you're talking about France,
>> where they eat babies too, so I guess this is a minor issue.
>
> Look Jon, if you're accused by the police in ANY country under ANY system
> you have to prove you're innocent. Don't let anyone tell you that the
> legal system here in the USA is any better than that in France though I'd
> bet its better than those hard headed Swiss courts.
Wrong again, Eunuch. You can actually win a criminal trial and not put on a
defense case if you've convinced the jury that the prosecution did not meet
its burden of proof. An example.
There was a murder trial of a nanny charged with killing a child in her
charge by setting the house on fire in Westchester Co. At trial her
attorney, a woman from NYC whose name I can't recall, did a masterful job of
knocking holes in the prosecution case by showing major inconsistencies
between prosecution testimony and real evidence introduced in court. The
prosecution rested its case. She stood up and simply said that the defense
rested. They then summed up to the jury and the jury acquitted. She and
her client took a massive risk but they came out winners all because the
jury found that the prosecution had not met its burden of proof.
