There needs to be trust in the justice system. Otherwise, there's no point in having a justice system. If he's cleared, then there wasn't enough evidence and he should be considered innocent. That's how our justice system works. Don't break the social contract because of your vendetta against rich people.

The problem is that our society doesn't encourage people to immediately report crimes nor provide sufficient support for people who have been abused.

[–] Chetzemoka@kbin.social 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (25 children)

Do you think OJ Simpson is innocent? Would you want your daughter or sister to marry him?

The are different standards for a reason. Society is perfectly capable of being aware that someone is a giant dickbag without there being enough evidence to justify using the power of the state to remove their freedom and incarcerate them. Those are two extraordinarily different things and you know it.

To suggest otherwise is to imply that the government is a perfect arbiter of dispute that we should all just blindly accept. Something tells me you wouldn't be so keen on that stance when it worked against your interests

[–] Ocelot@lemmies.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I recommend watching "The People vs OJ Simpson" on this. It doesn't really get into guilty vs not guilty, but just showcases just how complicated things got in that case.

[–] harpuajim@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

As soon as they started arguing over the hair samples I started understanding how complicated that case was.

load more comments (23 replies)

load more comments (65 replies)