Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
If one uses the logic that a jury made the determination that Libby lied and obstructed justice, and therefore it is true. Then one would be forced into - a jury made the determination that O.J. simpson is not guilty of murder, and therefore it is true. I don't believe we really on to use the argument that because a jury found Libby guilty that he in-fact lied on a material matter.
|
If you don't believe he lied on a material matter then the burden of proof is on you as there is overwhelming evidence to suggest he did, enough to say that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
It should also be stated that the burden of guilt is much higher than the burden of non-guilt thus concluding someone committed an illegal act who was found guilty by a jury is more reasonable then concluding because someone was found not guilty they did not commit an illegal act.