CyberForum

 


I KNOW. BUT HE JUST CONSIDERS THEM GUILTY WITH JUST THAT.

by What Do You Think? (no login)

 

.PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE - > CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE - > BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT .

LIKE YOU SAID FOR HIM IT STOPS AT PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE. IT DOESN'T EVEN REACH CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE AND HE ALREADY JUDGES THEM GUILTY.

I WONDER HOW HE'D REACT TO BEING CONSIDERED GUILTY JUST AT PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE AGAINST HIM?



Posted on Feb 5, 2008, 3:59 PM
from IP address 68.229.136.204


Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  

WWW.NEWSFLASH.ORG