02 Jan 07
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneObviously, yes it would.
Would it bother you to be jailed for life for a crime you didn't commit? Why?
(As an aside I've heard that you get three square meals a day, have all the time in the world for reading and can study etc... Can't be all bad.)
Ooops: Why?
Because a judgement has been made that is flawed, or is based on flawed evidence. Clearly that is due to human fallacy of some kind.
02 Jan 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandWhy should you have any expectation that you receive a fair judgement?
Obviously, yes it would.
(As an aside I've heard that you get three square meals a day, have all the time in the world for reading and can study etc... Can't be all bad.)
Ooops: Why?
Because a judgement has been made that is flawed, or is based on flawed evidence. Clearly that is due to human fallacy of some kind.
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneIn this world? It surprises me that there is the amount of reasonable judgement that there is.... Look around you, how many people claim to know what is the 'right' way to live? How can all of them be right? Which is right, and how many others are deluded? That why I agree with your original statement - the truth will set you free.
Why should you have any expectation that you receive a fair judgement?
Anyway - go on.
03 Jan 07
2 edits
Originally posted by snowinscotlandAre you saying it would bother you, yet you wouldn't have any expectation of receiving a fair judgement? So what is it that would bother you about not receiving a fair judgement?
In this world? It surprises me that there is the amount of reasonable judgement that there is.... Look around you, how many people claim to know what is the 'right' way to live? How can all of them be right? Which is right, and how many others are deluded? That why I agree with your original statement - the truth will set you free.
Anyway - go on.
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI would expect that somewhere in the midst of all this chaos on average I would be treated not too unfairly. I suppose if I had been in Iraq or Afganistan and was now in Gauntanamo, I would be annoyed that I couldn't even have pretended that I'd have had a fair trial.
Are you saying it would bother you, yet you wouldn't have any expectation of receiving a fair judgement? So what is it that would bother you about not receiving a fair judgement?
On balance, I've been well and poorly treated. To be in prison for a framed murder, as opposed to the 50 Kg of coke I'd smuggled, mmmmmmmm. I'd appeal.
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandThis reads as if you acknowledge that there is a 'truth' that would point to those who actually know the 'right' way to live vs. those who are deluded.
In this world? It surprises me that there is the amount of reasonable judgement that there is.... Look around you, how many people claim to know what is the 'right' way to live? How can all of them be right? Which is right, and how many others are deluded? That why I agree with your original statement - the truth will set you free.
Anyway - go on.
03 Jan 07
2 edits
Originally posted by snowinscotlandThis reads as though you feel that you should have a right to receive a fair trial. Why?
I would expect that somewhere in the midst of all this chaos on average I would be treated not too unfairly. I suppose if I had been in Iraq or Afganistan and was now in Gauntanamo, I would be annoyed that I couldn't even have pretended that I'd have had a fair trial.
On balance, I've been well and poorly treated. To be in prison for a framed murder, as opposed to the 50 Kg of coke I'd smuggled, mmmmmmmm. I'd appeal.
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneNot really. Some will, some will get off, some are convicted who it is later shown were not culpable of the charge.
This reads as though you feel that you should be able to receive a fair trial. Why?
The system is setup by fallable humans.
re
This reads as if you acknowledge that there is a 'truth' that would point to those who actually know the 'right' way to live vs. those who are deluded.
Well - let's say that self belief is a marvellous thing until it becomes more about how to tell others how to think. Each has to travel the pathway.
03 Jan 07
2 edits
Originally posted by snowinscotlandYou must've replied while I was editing the previous post. I changed it to 'have a right to' instead of 'be able to', since you're being so literal about everything.
Not really. Some will, some will get off, some are convicted who it is later shown were not culpable of the charge.
The system is setup by fallable humans.
re
This reads as if you acknowledge that there is a 'truth' that would point to those who actually know the 'right' way to live vs. those who are deluded.
Well - let's say that self belie ...[text shortened]... ntil it becomes more about how to tell others how to think. Each has to travel the pathway.
You've lost me with your second paragraph. I have no idea what that has to do with there being a 'right' way to live. Are you having trouble separating the idea from the implementation?
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You must've replied while I was editing the previous post. I changed it to 'have a right to' instead of 'be able to', since you're being so literal about everything.
You've lost me with your second paragraph. I have no idea what that has to do with there being a 'right' way to live. Are you having trouble separating the concept from the implementation?
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneGets a bit confusing sometimes with these edits etc.
You must've replied while I was editing the previous post. I changed it to 'have a right to' instead of 'be able to', since you're being so literal about everything.
You've lost me with your second paragraph. I have no idea what that has to do with there being a 'right' way to live. Are you having trouble separating the idea from the implementation?
(Forgive me for being literal. I have a background that includes validation; where you have to say exactly what is and is not, or you are assuming and all sorts of things go wrong. eg people get hurt)
Let's take it that I think it would be preferable to get a fair trial. Can you develop your point from there?
03 Jan 07
Originally posted by snowinscotlandMerely preferable?
Gets a bit confusing sometimes with these edits etc.
(Forgive me for being literal. I have a background that includes validation; where you have to say exactly what is and is not, or you are assuming and all sorts of things go wrong. eg people get hurt)
Let's take it that I think it would be preferable to get a fair trial. Can you develop your point from there?
04 Jan 07
1 edit
Originally posted by snowinscotlandIdeally you would be judged justly. Ideally everyone would be judged justly. Do you picture any time in the past, present or future where this wouldn't be the ideal?
Am I being too realistic?
What was the choice of words...
I would expect a 'right' to a fair trial......