Re: We're royally fucked -- It's Debateable

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3] ]

Subject: Re: We're royally fucked

Author:
Anne

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 05:16:07 07/01/02 Mon
In reply to: Alan 's message, "Re: We're royally fucked" on 07:37:04 06/30/02 Sun

>>The Bill of Rights is to protect the *innocent*. Not
>>help the guilty get off on a technicality.
>
>It is to protect the innocent precisely BY allowing
>the guilty to get off on "technicalities." I believe
>firmly that it is better to let a hundred guilty
>people go free than to send one innocent to prison.
>
>Alan

Hmmm, well what a shame that the cops didn't screw up (maybe *mistakenly* - you assume that the police are out to overstep their authority every time they turn around) when they went to arrest Andrea Yates. Then maybe the poor woman could have gotten off. I'm sure you would agree.

Anne

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Re: We're royally fucked	Alan	01:36:23 07/02/02 Tue
Re: We're royally fucked -- Anne, 05:22:57 07/02/02 Tue