Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus
In that situation Hernandez would have the opportunity to speak for himself. He will have had the opportunity to provide a defense, which to this point has been completely lacking. Such a defense is important in justice and in humane treatment, except in Cultbrennanland, where no evidence is required and people are guilty only because the all-seeing Cult says they are.
As for the China part, you have not gotten my point at all or you wouldn't say that or the other inhumane things that you have said on the subject. You have no understanding at all of the value of due process or ethical behavior towards an accused.
But, as we've seen again and again, you're not going to let silly things like morals get in the way of your pointless, short-term, superficial titilllation.
|
First off, I'm almost certain your some super Buddhist thats all free loving and sees only good in all people; that people can do no wrong. (Thats what I've gathered from past arguments with you and from todays arguments)
You also seem like someone who was mad that Bin Laden didn't get a trial either.
And by that scenario/example I had listed, a trial wasn't what I was referring to. Its not something that would occur elsewhere, it can definitely occur here. I'm referring to the arraignment that occurred today where the lawyer is going over evidence and Hernandez is sitting there silent. So I don't need your smart ass remarks about Cult land. Right now, You, are on no more of a pedestal of knowledge than I am on this subject. Your view of 'he needs to speak in court and we need to hear his side of the story' gets washed further and further away with the more and more evidence that comes out.
I think he's guilty, you think the evidence is leaning towards that he's guilty. He's going to get his trial like everyone else has before him. What the hell else do you want to argue about?