Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Prince · 09-07-2003, 09:33 AM

Spoke to my wife yesterday and she mentioned that when it comes to crimes dealing with narcotics, there is no burden of proof. Essentially, she suggested, that the following could happen: someone we barely know, our neighbour for example, could get busted for possession of marijuana. He could then claim that he bought it from us, even though we never spoke with him, and we've never had weed. We could do time for this fake crime even if there was NO PROOF other than our neighbour's word. Is this true? How the hell could this be? Isn't this extremely unconstitutional? What is this Gestapo shit?

09-07-2003, 09:33 AM	#1 (permalink)
Prince /nɑndəsˈkrɪpt/ Location: LV-426	Burden of Proof Spoke to my wife yesterday and she mentioned that when it comes to crimes dealing with narcotics, there is no burden of proof. Essentially, she suggested, that the following could happen: someone we barely know, our neighbour for example, could get busted for possession of marijuana. He could then claim that he bought it from us, even though we never spoke with him, and we've never had weed. We could do time for this fake crime even if there was NO PROOF other than our neighbour's word. Is this true? How the hell could this be? Isn't this extremely unconstitutional? What is this Gestapo shit? __________________ Who is John Galt?