Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Pistorius problem
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 46 of 50 (739239)
10-22-2014 5:53 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by ramoss
10-21-2014 10:05 PM


Re: Oscar gets a 5 year bit
There was no jury; this was a judge-led trial. As, I understand, is normal in South Africa.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by ramoss, posted 10-21-2014 10:05 PM ramoss has not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 47 of 50 (739689)
10-26-2014 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by 1.61803
10-21-2014 2:57 PM


Re: Oscar gets a 5 year bit
He blew her shit away
Now that would be funny, if the judge had stated that. I'd have more respect for her if she had. Colloquial maybe, but at least you are in touch with reality and have the intuition to observe that something wasn't quite right.
I understand the innocent until proven guilty rule as millions are innocent and perhaps only one is guilty. To then pick a suspect and say he is guilty until proven innocent, would be totally nuts.
....However, the burden of proof itself, is the problem here I believe. The judge is constrained by the law.
The problem with the justice system/s, is that they don't allow the burden of proof to shift, they instead FIX it in place even if the facts of the cases differ greatly from one another.
Logically this is a problem, because in a case such as the Pistorius case, we have strange circumstances that lead to a genuine rational incredulity. And logically, the burden exists to be placed upon the claim that is most incredulous/fantastical/not plausible/silly/improbable/incredible. Otherwise it should at least be equalized, because one party is claiming he murdered and another party is claiming he didn't, but the strange facts themselves show that he was DIRECTLY INVOLVED.
Think about it - it has nothing to do with the positive or negative, it has everything to do with the claim that runs counter to reality. If someone said, "prove you are human", they would have to prove I am not even though they are requesting I prove something, so the burden would be upon THEM because of REALITY.
For example, the reason you don't have to prove Christ rose from the grave as an atheist, is because the claim is fantastic. The burden of proof is upon me to prove it.
AXIOM: "The greater a claim, the greater the evidence must be to support it."
The burden-of-proof should always be placed upon the claim running counter to reality, probability, plausibility, etc...IMHO, for the sake of fairness.
With the Pistorius-case, I would say there are enough facts for the burden to be equalized which would obviously mean that both the defense and prosecution would have to equally prove their claims, respectively, and the best theory to fit the facts would then, "win", so to speak. But this rule could only apply depending on the circumstances of each case. For example, if you were being prosecuted based only on tenuous, circumstantial evidence, then the burden should be on the prosecutors. Example, "you were seen in the area of the crime".
That's my opinion. I could be wrong but I think it makes sense - some stories people give are utterly counter to reality, they should also have to prove their silly stories. (Dr A would love to get me here and say, "like the resurrection!!" - but don't be opportunist, I am being honest, isn't it enough that I admit that the burden is upon me?)
I don't think the resurrection is silly, I am not saying that, I am only saying that claims that go against the inductions that have been observed to churn out the same results forever and a day, don't need to "prove themselves". We accept oxygen, germ-theory, gravity, et al. It is merely reasonable for someone to ask we prove or heavily evidence a fantastic claim.
Chances are he was guilty in this case, if we estimate based on the facts. Objectively, all the people I have asked would not pump bullets into a door if someone was behind it, no matter if panicked. The power of having a gun in ones hand gives them the power to threaten and make a loud warning-noise, that alone would be enough to stop people shooting at a door that is closed, meaning there is no threat except behind the door, locked away. It makes ZERO rational sense.
Alas, mine is but one opinion, perhaps of little worth. Sorry for rambling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by 1.61803, posted 10-21-2014 2:57 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by 1.61803, posted 10-27-2014 11:13 AM mike the wiz has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 48 of 50 (739716)
10-27-2014 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by mike the wiz
10-26-2014 5:14 PM


Re: Oscar gets a 5 year bit
Hello Mike,
I get the jist of what you are saying.
Just the other day I see a case on the boob tube about a Polo mogul/Tycoon from Miami who ran up a 300 dollar bar tab, inebriated gets into his 100k Bentley and smashs into a poor college student's Hyundai killing him.
He flees the scene of the crime possibly allowing the young man to drown and die. He claims he went to a buddys man cave and that is where he decided to consume mass amounts of booze. Before calling 911. He also claims his Bentley brakes failed.
Yah we will see how the jury finds this one.
It's not about what you know, but what you can prove.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by mike the wiz, posted 10-26-2014 5:14 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by mike the wiz, posted 10-27-2014 4:20 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 49 of 50 (739760)
10-27-2014 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by 1.61803
10-27-2014 11:13 AM


Re: Oscar gets a 5 year bit
Yeah that kinda sums it all up your example. Reminds me of the boater-couple who sped into a harbour and went into another boat at speed, ripping a lady's face off. Couple proceeded to look and see how bad the damage was, by hovering there in their boat watching the show, then decided it was bad enough to do a bunk. Forget the ambulance, forget your mistake, forget your conscience, just save your skins incase she dies slowly as you watch.
What a lovely world we live in, with such decent people.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by 1.61803, posted 10-27-2014 11:13 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 50 of 50 (773516)
12-03-2015 10:28 AM


Back to the pokey?
Well it looks like blade runner may be getting a new set of black and whites.
South Africa's Supreme Court finds Oscar Pistorius guilty of murder

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024