Is it Innocent until proven guilty?!
Question: or guilty until proven innocent?
Personally I believe that it's guilty until proven innocent.
Answers: or guilty until proven innocent?
Personally I believe that it's guilty until proven innocent.
If a person were innocent until proven guilty, the person wouldn't need a lawyer to prove innocence.
Did you ever notice that the person being accused is the one who has to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it wasn't him/her?
On answers, it's always guilty. No one is innocent.
The latter. It seems a person must prove their innocence - instead of the other way around.
well then you would be wrong.
well
according to the U.S. constitution it is and most courts oeprate that way.
However the IRS is totally above that.
If they say you are guilty of tax fraud or evasion, you are automatically guilty and must prove yourself innocent in an audit.
sux
guilty until proven innocent.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
innocent until proven guilty
technically it is innocent until proven guilty...
but i can understand your point of view...
i dont see it the way you do though...
its guilty until proven innocent. But legally, its innocent until proven guilty
yeah, guilty until prov-en innocent, In the 16 century.
Today it is innocent untill provin guilty.
innocent until proven guilty
In writing, it's innocent until proven guilty. In practice, it can and has gone both ways.
YES IT IS INNOCENT INSTILL PROVEN GUILTY B/C IF A PERSON CANT FIND PROVES YOU DID SOMETHING THEN PROBLABLY NOTHING HAPPENED
Yes always
I think you stole my bike.
Now would you rather be guilty until proven innocent, or innocent until proven guilty?
It is, that is the law, but unfortunately, the media and people take it the other way round as do certain corporations.
i believe you are wrong
innocent until proven guilty
By American law... it is Innocent until proven guilty... but what is TRUE and weird... if you get in trouble in the Marine Corps... you're HONESTLY..... GUILTY until proven innocent.
I never understood that.... never.
a guilty person must prove their innocence, and an innocent person could be proven guilty by Judge Judy or some one like that. it seems like a never ending vicious cycle of proving. so i think both are correct.
The second one. Have you watched Law and Order? Any suspect is hounded until they come up with an alibi or someone better comes along. It's sad but true
It's supposed to be "innocent until proven guilty," but with the way many court cases are going in the media (especially in cases involving police brutality) it might as well be gulity until proven innocent. It's bloody ridiculous
All throw the law states Innocent until proven guilty; you are treated as guilty until proven innocent. So I must agree with you on this issue: the police treat you like a dirt bag, and they never apologize for it either!
Guilty til proven innocent....and then stigma lingers...sorry but true.
It does work both ways I guess.