NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/comp/org/eff/talk/4841

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-25 | 1.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!coldbox!fredbox!system
From: [e-mail] (George W. Hayduke)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Phreaks indicted
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 17:05:05 ADT
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Bedlam Institute of Higher Learning
Lines: 26

[e-mail] writes:

> Furthermore, as citizens, we have the right to know when our neighbors are
> accused of a crime. Since our system provides for a presumption of
> innocence, it's up to us to view an arrested individual as innocent until
> proven guilty. Therefore, there should be no presumed shame in having
> been charged with a crime, only in being found guilty of one.

You can't be serious...

If Waldo Q. Milquetoast, your next door neighbor, was listed in the paper as
a suspect in a child molestation, I highly doubt you would let your 9 year
old daughter play in the front yard anymore. Most people simply don't think
this way, which is why one must obtain high-priced lawyers and buy one's way
out of the charges.

If the citizenry has the right to know who is supposedly a child molester,
then why do we fool anyone by claiming innocent until proven guilty? If we
are innocent until proven guilty, then no one should know if someone stands
accused until they are convicted.


--------------------------------------------------------------!oo!----------
from the mythical, nonexistant SYSTEM 0PERATOR | The FredBox [phone]
[e-mail] | uunet!coldbox!fredbox!system | [e-mail]
Home of a few raving lunatics and myriads of electronic publications.