Post #4350 by Dope1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (35)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

You can certainly cite individual examples. I'm sure there are a number of them. That doesn't negate albaby's point of presumption of innocence.

No one is questioning that. He's shifting the debate from the on-the-ground reality of how the system actually works and delivers results to a principle that literally no one has a problem with. Classic Motte and Bailey debate tactics.

In all the cases I cited, the system could have remanded these people to custody to await trail because of a lengthy track record of arrests, some violent. That has nothing to do with the principle of innocent until proven guilty.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (35)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.