Discrimination Is A Bad Thing

Gold9472

Tired...
Staff member
Discrimination Is A Bad Thing

I watched a movie last night called "Hijacking Catastrophe". The makers of the movie tried to show the events before, and after 9/11. At one point, they made reference to the "Nuremberg Trials". After seeing mention of that, it occurred to me that maybe someday we'll see "The 9/11 Trials".

Think of it. Everyone responsible for the atrocities facing the judgment of their peers in a courtroom. That includes foreign nationals, and local ones.

I started to think of the evidence that would be brought to light, and then I took it a step further. I started to think of every other murder trial I've seen. The first thing the prosecution tries to do, is establish intent or motive. The second thing the prosecution tries to establish is proof of guilt. The defense tries to prove the innocence of their client. The final step is for a jury to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty or innocent. The judge carries out the sentencing or the dismissal.

I started to think of previous trials where the defendant was found to be guilty (or innocent even though guilt was indisputable). Charles Manson killed all of those people because he enjoyed it. O.J. Simpson killed Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman because of jealousy. Charles Stuart murdered his pregnant wife Carol for insurance money.

When people, myself included, try to establish Government involvement in 9/11, the first response we always hear is, "The President Of The United States would never murder Americans". What puts the President and his Administration above murder? Is it money? Is it power? Is it position? To my understanding, the President Of The United States and his Administration are human. Capable of joy, capable of jealousy, and capable of greed.

During the civil rights movement, Americans fought for equality. They fought for the rights of blacks, and the rights of women. As a result, blacks received "Affirmative Action", and women received the right to vote. We learned that discrimination, in any form, is a bad thing.

The difference between a normal murderer, and a rich one with power is that a rich one with power can kill more people.

Let's not discriminate against murderers.
 
murder is murder no matter what position in life. at some point they will be judged.
 
You're wrong Jon, the defense does not try to prove innocence. The defense simply tries to cast doubt on the evidence. Thats why someone is found not guilty rather than innocent.
 
somebigguy said:
You're wrong Jon, the defense does not try to prove innocence. The defense simply tries to cast doubt on the evidence. Thats why someone is found not guilty rather than innocent.

The purpose of the "defense" is to defend their client. Their client being the individual charged for the crime. In order to defend their client, they either have to prove reasonable doubt (what you spoke of), or prove innocence by introducing that which proves innocence (a confession from the real murderer, etc...).

Either way, my point is valid.
 
Gold9472 said:
The purpose of the "defense" is to defend their client. Their client being the individual charged for the crime. In order to defend their client, they either have to prove reasonable doubt (what you spoke of), or prove innocence by introducing that which proves innocence (a confession from the real murderer, etc...).

Either way, my point is valid.

um ... I thought everyone was innocent until proven guilty.

If I understand our legal system (which I may not), I thought the burdeon of proof was on the prosecution ... meaning they must prove a person to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
 
danceyogamom said:
um ... I thought everyone was innocent until proven guilty.

If I understand our legal system (which I may not), I thought the burdeon of proof was on the prosecution ... meaning they must prove a person to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

They are... but a "suspect" is a "suspect" for a reason... because there's a chance they may be "guilty"...
 
Back
Top