No one is innocent
At least not in court.
There have been three major celebrity trials in California in past years that have tied up the news media for weeks, O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, and Micheal Jackson. It proves that California can't convict anyone famous, be he black, white, or other. To me, that's sad, but not annoying.
What is annoying, however, is the people around the country and on the news who declared that Michael Jackson was found innocent by the courts. NO HE WASN'T. Nor was OJ. Nor was Blake. Call it a pet peeve, but I can't stand that blatant display of ignorance. I understand that Innocence is the opposite of guilt, and it's natural to want to assume that if you're not guilty, you must be innocent, but it's also wrong.
The fallacy is that you must be on one end or the other of the guilt/innocence dichotomy. But, you don't really have to. Think of this way. Cold is the opposite of Hot. If I say it's hot outide, you think it must be, oh, at least 75 degrees out there. If I say it's cold outside, you think it must be, oh, near freezing. That leaves alot of room in the middle... you know... the days in early summer when it's not hot outside, and the days in late fall when it's not cold outside. Not hot, only means... not hot. Not guilty only means.... you guessed it... not guilty.
In fact, take a look at how you can plead in court. If you're brought up on charges you can plead Guilty, Not Guilty, or No Contest. That's it. If you try to plead innocent, the judge will look at you, and your lawyer, like you're idiots, and make you pick from that list of 3 again.
As long as we're on the subject, "lie detectors" don't detect lies. They detect a variety of physiological responses and report them on a graph. When you become agitated, even if you hide it well, the needles pick it up. And yet, time and again, folks claim that machine caught people lying. Here's an example of a question that would most likely show up as a lie on the "lie detector", "Have you ever raped your mother?" I dare you to not have a response to that. Does it mean you did it? No! It means you're considering beating the examinor with his own equipment, but the equipment will detect a response from you. So, clearly, when you say no, you're lying. Right?
So, remember, you're never innocent in court, and when I'm hooked up to a lie detector and say I wasn't the one that drank all your beer... I'm telling the truth.
There have been three major celebrity trials in California in past years that have tied up the news media for weeks, O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, and Micheal Jackson. It proves that California can't convict anyone famous, be he black, white, or other. To me, that's sad, but not annoying.
What is annoying, however, is the people around the country and on the news who declared that Michael Jackson was found innocent by the courts. NO HE WASN'T. Nor was OJ. Nor was Blake. Call it a pet peeve, but I can't stand that blatant display of ignorance. I understand that Innocence is the opposite of guilt, and it's natural to want to assume that if you're not guilty, you must be innocent, but it's also wrong.
The fallacy is that you must be on one end or the other of the guilt/innocence dichotomy. But, you don't really have to. Think of this way. Cold is the opposite of Hot. If I say it's hot outide, you think it must be, oh, at least 75 degrees out there. If I say it's cold outside, you think it must be, oh, near freezing. That leaves alot of room in the middle... you know... the days in early summer when it's not hot outside, and the days in late fall when it's not cold outside. Not hot, only means... not hot. Not guilty only means.... you guessed it... not guilty.
In fact, take a look at how you can plead in court. If you're brought up on charges you can plead Guilty, Not Guilty, or No Contest. That's it. If you try to plead innocent, the judge will look at you, and your lawyer, like you're idiots, and make you pick from that list of 3 again.
As long as we're on the subject, "lie detectors" don't detect lies. They detect a variety of physiological responses and report them on a graph. When you become agitated, even if you hide it well, the needles pick it up. And yet, time and again, folks claim that machine caught people lying. Here's an example of a question that would most likely show up as a lie on the "lie detector", "Have you ever raped your mother?" I dare you to not have a response to that. Does it mean you did it? No! It means you're considering beating the examinor with his own equipment, but the equipment will detect a response from you. So, clearly, when you say no, you're lying. Right?
So, remember, you're never innocent in court, and when I'm hooked up to a lie detector and say I wasn't the one that drank all your beer... I'm telling the truth.
Glintir |
7/14/2005 02:05:00 PM
|
