Originally posted by Renzo
That makes no sense. The jury in a criminal court USES the balance of probabilities [burden of proof]. The one used here is the "beyond a reasonable doubt" burden of proof. And they found him not guilty of all charges.
So the very thing that you say you use, they used. And they are in a better position to find culpability than you are.
There are two tests before the law... beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal) and balance of probabilities (civil)... Balance of Probabilities means that it is more likely then not (or vice versa).
boris_the_bear
quote:
Originally posted by jonSun
If I had a rubber hose I would beat you all to Beat It.
:stongue: :stongue: omfg!!!!!11
Renzo
quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
There are two tests before the law... beyond a reasonable doubt (criminal) and balance of probabilities (civil)... Balance of Probabilities means that it is more likely then not (or vice versa).
There's a reason why criminal courts use the highest level of burden of persuasion. A man's liberty is at stake. Preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence would never suffice.
ChemEnhanced
where there's smoke, there's fire
I am sure MJ had inappropriate relations with children.
dukes
see apparently madame tussauds is getting rid of jacksons waxwork.... they are replacing it with him
woscar
quote:
Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I think you make yours on some personal attachment to a public image.
Not at all, I'm just being objective. And you didn't answer my question.
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by Renzo
There's a reason why criminal courts use the highest level of burden of persuasion. A man's liberty is at stake. Preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence would never suffice.
I agree with you. All I was saying is that for me to be satisfied I only need a balance of probabilities... if I had the power to incarcerate then I'd demand a higher burden but I don't.
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by woscar
Not at all, I'm just being objective. And you didn't answer my question.
See the people's evidence in both cases against him... that was enough to satisfy me. So we weigh the evidence differently... I don't care what you think.
woscar
Question remains unanswered.
we_R_DNA
I dedicate this song in memory of those who have passed on:
Peter-Paul Pigmans (January 31, 1961–August 27, 2003)
Michael Joseph Jackson (August 29, 1958 – June 25, 2009)
Moral Hazard
quote:
Originally posted by woscar
Question remains unanswered.
You asked for my evidence... I referred you to the People's evidence in the People v. Jackson.... the transcript is way more comprehensive then I could be. Do some reading.
jonSun
FFS HE IS MICHAEL JACKSON PEOPLE
If i had a lil boy i would be honored MJ let him suck his discolored pecker
