Quote:
Originally posted by water_boy1999
Couldn't agree with you more KnifeMissle. Those are all my points exactly. It just seems that not enough was done to prove this guy was innocent. Everything was done to prove him guilty. Now is this just because the writer decided to write the article this way to make us sustain our disbelief or is this what gist of the story really is?
*generalization*
So, should I be bent on not trusting our legal system or bent on the way journalism misleads?
|
Well, you might not have to do either, quite yet.
Your justice system is based on an adversarial system. You have two adversaries, one of them trying to prove him guilty and the other to prove him innocent. The prosecutor didn't do very much to prove his innocence because that's
not his job. That's the job of his
defense lawyer. If his lawyer didn't do his job then he should have gotten a better lawyer. Welcome to the America Way...