Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: STARWISE

"Wisenberg said the government is not required to prove guilt with 100% certainty."

Is this true or is this Clintoonesque, parsed lawyerspeak?


9 posted on 03/03/2007 2:00:50 PM PST by Roccus (They're living in the Dark Ages and they act like they own the world. [Dmitri Gredenko])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Roccus

100% certainty != reasonable doubt


12 posted on 03/03/2007 2:04:33 PM PST by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Roccus

Not really. Theres a difference between shadow of a doubt and reasonable doubt.

That being said proving beyond a reasonable doubt is no low hurdle.


14 posted on 03/03/2007 2:06:07 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Roccus
Is this true or is this Clintoonesque, parsed lawyerspeak?

Yes :-)

In other words, it's both.

22 posted on 03/03/2007 2:17:36 PM PST by sourcery (Government Warning: The Attorney General has determined that Federal Regulation is a health hazard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Roccus

Yea, suppose they prove guilt at 72% ...Good enough?


23 posted on 03/03/2007 2:19:22 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Roccus

"Is this true or is this Clintoonesque, parsed lawyerspeak?"

____


Solomon Wisenberg worked for Kenneth Starr.
He was not a part of the Clinton gang.


41 posted on 03/03/2007 3:58:50 PM PST by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson