Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. SubscriberKingDavid403
    King David
    Planet Earth.
    Joined
    19 May '05
    Moves
    143294
    07 Nov '16 03:09
    😛😀
  2. Joined
    03 Feb '07
    Moves
    147007
    07 Nov '16 04:10
    Yep! The Illuminati rigged the system again!
  3. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    07 Nov '16 08:54
    She was not found innocent. All Mr Comey stated was that the FBI;s position had not changed, that being that they found no evidence of intent, that does not prove that Mrs Clinton is innocent because for that to happen she would need to go to trial.
  4. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    07 Nov '16 09:12
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    She was not found innocent. All Mr Comey stated was that the FBI;s position had not changed, that being that they found no evidence of intent, that does not prove that Mrs Clinton is innocent because for that to happen she would need to go to trial.
    that IS being innocent, doofus.
  5. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    07 Nov '16 09:162 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    that IS being innocent, doofus.
    No its not. She was not found innocent by anyone and if you don't know the difference then I suggest that you ask someone for help. Please note the title, 'Hillary found innocent'. For her to be 'found innocent', she would need to go to trial, which she has not. Someone with your scant powers of discernment and negligible grasp of reality should not be terming anyone doofus.
  6. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    07 Nov '16 09:351 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    No its not. She was not found innocent by anyone and if you don't know the difference then I suggest that you ask someone for help. Please note the title, 'Hillary found innocent'. For her to be 'found innocent', she would need to go to trial, which she has not. Someone with your scant powers of discernment and negligible grasp of reality should not be terming anyone doofus.
    you don't find someone innocent. they are innocent until proven guilty.

    your opinion on her is a different matter and one i give 0 lovings about.

    " Please note the title, 'Hillary found innocent'."
    the title is wrong. it's either sarcasm or not knowing a basic principle of civilized society but wrong nonetheless.

    " For her to be 'found innocent', she would need to go to trial, which she has not"
    nope. for her to be found guilty she would need to go to trial. there's a difference. she is innocent now, she doesn't need a trial to prove she is innocent.
  7. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    07 Nov '16 09:50
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    you don't find someone innocent. they are innocent until proven guilty.

    your opinion on her is a different matter and one i give 0 lovings about.

    " Please note the title, 'Hillary found innocent'."
    the title is wrong. it's either sarcasm or not knowing a basic principle of civilized society but wrong nonetheless.

    " For her to be 'found innoce ...[text shortened]... . there's a difference. she is innocent now, she doesn't need a trial to prove she is innocent.
    You seem to be talking a lot but not saying anything. Only a court of law can find you either guilty or innocent. Why this simple fact evades you I cannot say.
  8. Standard memberapathist
    looking for loot
    western colorado
    Joined
    05 Feb '11
    Moves
    9664
    07 Nov '16 10:05
    Presumption of innocence is legal right.

    Courts either find the accused to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, or the accused is to be acquitted. Courts never find the accused to be innocent.
  9. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    07 Nov '16 10:233 edits
    Originally posted by apathist
    Presumption of innocence is legal right.

    Courts either find the accused to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, or the accused is to be acquitted. Courts never find the accused to be innocent.
    No one is questioning whether presumption of innocence is a legal right. Fine for Mrs Clinton to be acquitted (found not guilty) she would need to face trail which she has not. There is a third scenario according to Scots law, that being not proven.
  10. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    07 Nov '16 14:02
    What does this all mean? In today's world he and his family were probably threatened.
  11. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    07 Nov '16 16:02
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    What does this all mean? In today's world he and his family were probably threatened.
    or mind controlled. chelsea's a level 4 telepath.
  12. Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    1420
    07 Nov '16 16:441 edit
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    that IS being innocent, doofus.
    Zahlanzi and Robbie: Gentlemen, Before things get too heated here, perhaps it would be best to get some input from the more "learned ones" on this site such as no1marauder or SH76. I think these two are more qualified to decide if Hillary Clinton is innocent or not. 🙂
  13. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    07 Nov '16 16:491 edit
    Originally posted by mchill
    Zahlanzi and Robbie: Gentlemen, Before things get too heated here, perhaps it would be best to get some input from the more "learned ones" on this site such as no1marauder or SH76. I think these two are more qualified to decide if Hillary Clinton is innocent or not. 🙂
    Apathist's post sums it up succinctly; people don't get found innocent in our legal system so the title of the thread is incorrect.

    The FBI found in July that there was insufficient evidence to charge HRC with any crime in the e-mail molehill and I am in agreement with that finding as are the vast majority of legal experts I have read who have commented on the case. Some are here: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-legal-idUSKCN0ZM04C
  14. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    07 Nov '16 17:13
    Originally posted by mchill
    Zahlanzi and Robbie: Gentlemen, Before things get too heated here, perhaps it would be best to get some input from the more "learned ones" on this site such as no1marauder or SH76. I think these two are more qualified to decide if Hillary Clinton is innocent or not. 🙂
    it doesn't take a lawyer to realize that civilized societies hold that you are innocent until proven guilty. if you are already innocent, how can you be proven so again?

    it won't get more heated because there is absolutely no fun in constantly smacking robbie over the head with common sense.
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52865
    07 Nov '16 17:15
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    No one is questioning whether presumption of innocence is a legal right. Fine for Mrs Clinton to be acquitted (found not guilty) she would need to face trail which she has not. There is a third scenario according to Scots law, that being not proven.
    You can quibble with semantics all day long but if the FBI says she did nothing wrong in a legal sense then, not being charged, she is logically innocent of charges that were never made. So she is innocent.
Back to Top