Re:Should a dog's sniff be enough to convict a person for mu...
by FpUser on Saturday October 30, 2021 @10:47AM
(#29049181)
Whatever the fuck happened to "beyond the reasonable doubts". Any reasonable person should have such in this case.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Should a dog's sniff be enough to convict a person for mu...
by vkou on Saturday October 30, 2021 @11:54AM
(#29049756)
You'd be surprised by what reasonable jurists believe is damning evidence.
Re:Should a dog's sniff be enough to convict a person for mu...
by FpUser on Saturday October 30, 2021 @01:12PM
(#29050410)
Well, not really. After reading about some cases I've long lost any trust I may have had in the system. It might be ok in general (do not have enough real stats) but when it comes to fucking up particular person's life without any consequences the government / their institutions shine.
Re:Should a dog's sniff be enough to convict a person for mu...
by pitay on Saturday October 30, 2021 @02:00PM
(#29050888)
Yeah the lack of consequences for those that administer justice is (I believe) the strongest reason an innocent person is convicted or punished far too harshly for the given crime. The only time I have heard of judges ever getting punished for their judgments is either when it is revealed that they have been taking bribes or their nation lost a war.