The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law -- U.S. Supreme Court, Coffin v. United States [1895].
Was [there] enough evidence to find that they were not guilty? -- ABC News, Matter of Martin Lee Anderson [2007].
Forget that musty old 19th-century Supreme Court stuff. According to ABC, there's a new legal standard in criminal cases; at least those in which the MSM is rooting for a conviction. Henceforth, the presumption of innocence is abolished. There shall be a presumption of guilt, and the burden will be on the accused to produce enough evidence to acquit himself.
View video here.
ABC's Kate Snow issued the new ruling in the course of interviewing the attorney and parents of Martin Lee Anderson, the 14-year old African-American boy whose death led to the indictment of employees of the Florida boot camp where he had been held. All the defendants were acquitted yesterday, but that wasn't good enough for Snow.
KATE SNOW: Gina [Jones, Martin Lee Anderson's mother], this was an all-white jury. Do you think if the make-up of the jury had been different, that you would be talking about a different verdict this morning?GINA JONES: Maybe, yes.
SNOW: Maybe, but you're not sure.
JONES: Yes.
SNOW: Do you think there was enough evidence to find that they were not guilty?
JONES: No.
While the Ivy-educated Snow apparently doesn't grasp the rudiments of our justice system, the boy's father did. His response clearly reflected his recognition that the burden of proof lay on the prosecution.
ROBERT ANDERSON: There was enough evidence [to convict]. It was right there in black and white. I mean, what else did you need, a rocket scientist to figure it out? All the evidence in the world, and they still came back with this not-guilty crap.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Wonderful
October 13, 2007 - 08:21 ET by allanfMark,
What is going on up in Ithaca? Kate Snow is a Cornell graduate!!! You would think somewhere in the liberal education provided by Cornell, Kate would have learned that one need prove nothing to be acquited in a criminal trial.
"Journalism" has declined so much that we really no longer expect someone like Kate Snow to actually grasp subtle concepts such as "reasonable doubt" and "burden of proof" (Coffin Case)? She does not disappoint. That's because feelings and her sense of "right and wrong" (shaped by liberals at Cornell) are what motivate her.
As for me I will always remember the beaming Kate Snow shown in the photo on Newsbusters after Al Gore won the Nobel Peace Prize. That really says all I need to know about Kate.
She is an entertainer. Don't mistake her or her ilk for serious people.
Let me know when the guys at Cornell give her an honory degree.
Nifonged again
October 13, 2007 - 08:19 ET by CatherwoodThis is nothing more than the Duke rape case being acted out on a different stage with different actors. It's purely a racial thing in which the evil white people are being blamed for crimes against a defenseless black person. More sugar!
Not to mention the Rodney
October 13, 2007 - 11:07 ET by robert108Not to mention the Rodney King case.
You Racist Idiot
October 13, 2007 - 15:12 ET by KeithYou racist idiot! Black people are not blaming "White People" for the death of this child. That's the racist assumptions you bring with you everytime some black person cries "foul", proving your bigotry. The guards in this case were BLACK, White and Asian which your racist butt would know if you actually LOOKED at the video. If you want to know why Whites are constantly accused of racism all you have to do is view the video! IF this were your WHITE child you'd be defecating all over your spineless self in an attempt to get someone to "do something". These people watched for over thirty minutes as this child DIED IN FRONT OF THEM. AFTER he collapsed they DRAGGED his prostrate form around the friggin' yard, assuming that he was "faking". When you consider the ALL WHITE JURY, always the friend of black youth everywhere, who deliberated for THIRTY G'DANGED MINUTES, it all begins to make sense. Funny, how you whites who pissed and moaned about the "speed of the deliberations" in the O.J. trial, as if that INDICATED malfeasance, are SILENT about the "speed of deliberations" now! Watch the video, before your predisposed opposition to all cries of "Foul" rises to the front of your small brain, would ya? You whine about how the "evil white people", are being blamed for "crimes against a defenseless black person", as if this is somehow untrue. What a Racist piece of crap you are. Was the child NOT DEFENSELESS? He was in custody, you sheet wearer! He was surrounded by GUARDS, you unbelievably inbred moron! What other definition of "defenseless" do you use in "stupid racist world"? Were the Whites holding slaves, evil? After they freed slaves and started the KKK to track and kill them, were whites "evil" then? How about when they formed laws to benefit themselves and HARM others? Evil yet? Or just a "sign of the times? I suspect you'd change your tune if your punk behind were the one being horse whipped. Were whites evil during segregation? OR Jim Crow? How about after that when you intentionally separated the black family by giving welfare to the woman on the condition that she get rid of the man? A condition imposed on WHITE welfare recipients NOWHERE, by the way. IT seems that your name should be CATHETER instead of CATHERWOOD because you've certainly got your head stuck up in a dark warm place~! White people have only recently been "civilized", I know you thought you were civilized but you really weren't. Civilized people don't try to dominate others. The white race just ended it's most recent attempts to dominate other races in 1965 a scant forty two years ago. Not even long enough for one person to grow old and die. And the heirs of their rampant criminality, (YOU) continue to act as if everyone should be as callous to the depravity that has existed in the hearts and actions of whites, as you are. You sir, disgust me.
Wow, Keith, tell us how you really feel about whites
October 13, 2007 - 16:01 ET by RJTalk about blatant, ugly, racism....
But, Keith, I'm confused. First, you say "The guards in this case were BLACK, White and Asian..." then you say "If you want to know why Whites are constantly accused of racism all you have to do is view the video!" One doesn't logically follow the other, or am I missing something?
As for much of the rest of your rant, rather than blaming it all on "whites", you should be laying majority blame where it belongs....on the Democrats. Some examples: the race riots in NY, the KKK, Jim Crow, and yes, even the welfare created separation of families can all be laid at the door of Democrats.
Are there Republican racists? Yes. Are there black racists? Yes. But, Keith your blanket condemnation of "whites" is way off base. In fact, if you approach it logically, you'll see that it's the Democrat Party which has deliberately worked to hold blacks down on their "plantation", while most Republicans want to bring them true equality.
RJ You greatly err when
October 13, 2007 - 17:34 ET by KeithRJ
You greatly err when you consider my comments in a vacuum. I was RESPONDING to the moron who was accusing someone of playing a "Race" card in this instance. When I gave examples of white racism from slavery till now, it was in response to his feigned outrage at whites being portrayed as "evil". I was making that point that if you were NOT white in this country, for most of this countries existence, whites HAVE BEEN EVIL! I realize that if it weren't for the help and sacrifice of decent godly white folks, blacks would never have been freed! So please don't get me wrong, I certainly don't think of ALL Whites as my "enemy", God forbid! But to act like the callous disdain with which racial matters are regarded by some "conservatives", isn't racist, is foolish! Look at Sean Hannity! He'll condemn a democrat, rightly for associating with people who have made vile anti-American remarks! And these weren't even the people who MADE the remarks, just people who still associate with them! But yet he'll have a vile racist like Mark Furhman on his show as an EXPERT PANELIST! Mark Furhman who was heard on tape saying that he wanted " TO PUT ALL BLACK PEOPLE IN A PILE AND BURN THEM!" and that if he saw a black man with a white woman he would make up an excuse to pull them over and then PLANT EVIDENCE ON THEM! This is the "cop" that Hannity goes to for EXPERTISE in matters legal! The reason that I said, "If you want to know why Whites are constantly accused of racism all you have to do is view the video!", is because the all white jury mysteriously came to a different judgement than most other sane people who have viewed the video! Similar to the way the O.J. jury apparently viewed a different case than everyone else, according to some people on this site. But strangely enough the people who were up in arms about that "miscarriage" of justice are silent as church mice now! I'm asking for consistency R.J! The O.J jury which was majority BLACK, despite a "mountain" of evidence, came to an adverse conclusion after a scant three hours or so of deliberation. An ALL WHITE, not "majority" white, jury, went the other way here, but strangely enough, some of the whites who are so excersised about this, can't see that. The "mountain" of evidence is on tape. THe jury only deliberated NINETY MINUTES, less than the OJ trial but not ONE supposedly non-racist conservative has objected in THIS case. Are we against rushed verdicts or only when the suspect is black and he gets off?
In the official VIDEO, a CHILD is being RUN LIKE A DOG until he collapses and THEN the indignities begin! He is PRODDED, and has smelling salts shoved up his nose, he is lifted to his feet and allowed to slump to the ground, IT IS HORRIBLE. A few weeks ago, a lot of Whites were up in arms about a black football player KILLING DOGS! Where is the concern now? A dog gets more sympathy than a dead fourteen yr old black child? How can these people NOT be racist? A CHILD dies in police custody, there is NO allegation that the child had "become violent" or had to be forcibly restrained and yet the posters on this site DON'T GIVE A DAMN! All they can do is condemn the people who went down there looking for "justice".
Keith, it's perfectly understandable that you would be upset
October 13, 2007 - 18:30 ET by RJand emotional about this, especially after viewing that ugly video.
However, unintentional or not, your post did tilt into a blanket condemnation of "whites." Your followup post has done the same. Further, by declaring that I'm in a vacuum on the subject, you presume and then insult me. I don't think you meant to do that, but that's how it comes across.
I describe all this because I think you are making an error in your appoach. What do you think the response is likely to be when you angrily and broadly condemn "whites?" Most of us on this board don't see ourselves as racist, and to shove the charge in our face will probably receive about the same response as Jackson, Sharpton, and other professional race baiters. i.e., most will just turn away, while others will fire back angrily.
Keith, you'll make more progress with thought-provoking arguments than you will with an angry broadside attack.
RJ WROTE, "In fact, if
October 13, 2007 - 17:53 ET by KeithRJ WROTE,
"In fact, if you approach it logically, you'll see that it's the Democrat Party which has deliberately worked to hold blacks down on their "plantation", while most Republicans want to bring them true equality. "
I AGREE with every word you wrote here my friend, it's the reason I'm not a democrat! The reason I'm not a Republican however, is because of their callous disdain to the history and unfortunate legacy of racism. Supposedly mature people can see "trickle down" theories and complex ramifications of macro economics that extend for years, yet can't see that the reason for most of the problems in the black community IS RACISM! Forty two years after giving blacks "civil rights" most of you act like you can't understand why blacks can't "get their act" together, to quote a moron. Yet you judge the efficacy of economic policy in GENERATIONS! Certainly able to take a "macro" view there! Conservatives piss and moan about the "black family" being dysfunctional when IT WAS WHITE PEOPLE WHO DESTROYED IT! What do you resonably think would be the result of policies like , Welfare where the woman can't be living with a man? Or families being "sold off " during slavery? To ignore the culpability of whites is really stupid considering the fact that this was the DESIRED RESULT for the racists who started these policies! The slave owners correctly theorized that the way to keep slaves docile was to separate families. Then they criminalized associating with one another from the same family. Then they made it illegal to speak their language, so plots couldn't grow. Years after slavery whites were at it again. They set up Planned Parenthood to kill off minorities so that they couldn't become the majority. They set up complex rules of society that denied blacks employment but offered them welfare with the stipulation that they not have a "father in the home". Most of you decent folks don't know about those rules in the welfare dept but they are true nonetheless. So that which was designed to have a desired effect is now having said effect and still you want to stick your heads in the sand?
Keith, this is even more racist than your first post
October 13, 2007 - 18:40 ET by RJYour anger seems to have coalesced into a hatred that doesn't allow you to differentiate between those who want blacks to succeed and those who don't.
First, you say you agree about the general difference between Republicans and Democrats. Then, you lump them together into another rant against "whites."
Come on, Keith, you can do better than this!
"Conservatives piss and
October 14, 2007 - 12:59 ET by MikeB"Conservatives piss and moan about the "black family" being dysfunctional when IT WAS WHITE PEOPLE WHO DESTROYED IT." No, Keith, it was the Democrat party which destroyed the "black family" with willing assistance from blacks. The Democrat party is made up of whites, blacks, hispanics, asians, the same as the Republican party is. However, it was the Democrat party which started all the socialist welfare programs and told black people that blacks were too stupid and/or lazy to make it on their own; they need the help of the Democrats to survive. Why, you can't even get or hold a job without the Democrats setting quotas to hire blacks in industry.
As for the slavery issue, Keith, who the hell do you think it was who stopped slavery in this country? Hint: it was WHITE people who believed slavery to be wrong. For that matter, Keith, who do you think the White slave traders bought their slaves from? Hey, Keith, it was your African "brothers" who sold your ancestors into slavery in the first place. To ignore the culpability of blacks is really stupid considering how they have cooperated with racists of all colors in their own destruction.
Some of the black "leaders" have claimed that AIDS and crack were inventions of whitey to either keep "darky" down or to exterminate black people. Assuming that is true (it is ridiculous, of course), why are blacks cooperating? You don't want AIDS? Stop jumping every warm body, and commit to a monogamous relationship. Oh, but that is also whitey keeping you down with their morality, isn't it? If crack cocaine is devastating the black population, STOP BUYING AND USING IT.
Keith, you need to do some self-examination before you start slinging that "racist" epithet around so freely.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Jena 6 innocent Boot Camp Guards Guilty
October 13, 2007 - 08:27 ET by ChasvsOf course there's no such thing as a guilty black on white crime anymore, but all white on black claims are automatically guilty unless PROVEN innocent?
The principle that there is
October 13, 2007 - 09:29 ET by dscottThe principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law -- U.S. Supreme Court, Coffin v. United States [1895].
That's what we were taught in school as the justification that the US legal system was the best in the world. However, as much as you want to believe this assertion, the ugly facts are that in practice many parts of the US legal system have tossed that ruling in the dumpster. Anyone who has dealt with the Family Law system (DV, custody, divorce) recognizes that the presumption of guilt or innocense is determined by gender and by race. The Duke LaCrosse case demonstrated that guilt by accusation is a well polish art in the criminal field as well (rape or even murder cases) where the victim is considered female and the perp. is a male. Most of this is predicated on the false notion advanced by feminists that a victim (female) has a right to be believed, i.e. guilt by accusation. No, as a victim you have a right to be heard and your claims to be investigated as to their veracity. The OT for good reason laid down the Law to deal with malicious witnesses and false accusors.
As you noted Mark, it seems they, the MSM, only apply the prinicple if it fits their PC agenda. Thus you now have an insight into how tyranny hijacks an otherwise reasonable legal system. The use of presumption and a series of other manipulations of the legal system by those who run it (lawyers and the judges) to promote their worldview (Political Correctness).
Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
Presumably the lawyers were
October 13, 2007 - 09:33 ET by motherbeltPresumably the lawyers were allowed their refusals for jurors. What
more does Snow expect? Some kind of scientific formula regarding what
combination of race constitutes a "fair" jury?
She has no business "leading the witness" so to speak, by asking the boy's mother if she thought the makeup of the jury was relevant.
Is Snow saying that the jury should match the victim's race? In another instance with a black defendant, would Snow be advocating that the jury should match the defendant's race?
Well, I'm sure Snow wants to
October 13, 2007 - 09:33 ET by rimskyWell, I'm sure Snow wants to interview the acquitted.. I mean, come on.. she will, right?
Al & Jesse
October 13, 2007 - 13:35 ET by Jerry MackThis is not the first time I have heard meadow muffins like this. I came to the conclusion long ago that some people in the msm are so scared of being called a racist that they will not take any position that could be interpreted as such.
Was OJ Proven innocent?
October 13, 2007 - 16:02 ET by ChasvsI guess she had no problem with a Blcak jury finding OJ innocent? Guess there must have been enough evidence that he was innocent!
The burden of proof should always be on the government.
October 13, 2007 - 16:51 ET by Dave RGovernment enjoys one right that the rest of us do not, and that is the right to deprive people of their freedom, and even their life. Given the stakes involved, the burden of proof should always rest with the government.
This will, at times, mean that the guilty go free. So be it, as that is far preferable to the alternative.
In many countries of the world, the prisons are full of people who were unable to prove their innocence. Thank God our founders took the steps they did to prevent that from happening here.
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Welcome to Democrat Justice
October 13, 2007 - 18:56 ET by jonathananderson"There's a new legal standard in criminal cases; at least those in which the MSM has a rooting interest. Henceforth, the presumption of innocence in such cases is abolished. There shall be a presumption of guilt, and the burden will be on the accused to produce enough evidence to acquit himself."
But this is nothing new to Man.
Isaiah 29:21
That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside [deliver ... accuse and convict] the just for a thing of naught.
Fortunately, there is justice for those who slander, calumniate, and defame ...
Isaiah 29:20
For the terrible one [the oppressor ... the persecutor] is brought to naught, and the scorner [the mocker ... the slanderer] is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity [the defamers and accusationists] are cut off:
Deuteronomy 19:16-19
(16) If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;
(17) Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;
(18) And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;
(19) Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
Psalms 72:4
He [God] shall judge the poor [afflicted, humble] of the people, He shall save the children of the needy [destitute], and shall break in pieces the oppressor.
"When you consider the ALL
October 13, 2007 - 22:01 ET by ckc1227"When you consider the ALL WHITE JURY, always the friend of black youth
everywhere, who deliberated for THIRTY G'DANGED MINUTES, it all begins
to make sense."
In your future racist rants, please do us a favor and at least make an attempt to get the facts right. The jury deliberated for NINETY G'DANGED MINUTES.
If folks learn nothing else from this tragedy, learn this: By not stealing cars and by not trespassing, you dramatically lower your risk of being abused by the criminal justice system, whether black, white, or otherwise.
The white race just ended
October 13, 2007 - 22:07 ET by ckc1227The white race just ended it's most recent attempts to dominate other
races in 1965 a scant forty two years ago. Not even long enough for one
person to grow old and die.
Too bad for Darfur, Rwanda and South Central that blacks didn't stop at the same time.