Susan-You could never win base on just one witness. You’d need a high degree of circumstantial evidence as well. You also have to convince twelve random people that the guy did it. It’s actually better than in biblical (and in fact, Roman) times when two guys could get together, say “that guy did it” and have him put to death. You really should study the history of the law before complaining about our methods. You would be amazed.
Llewellenbruce over 14 years ago
Anything you say may be used against you.
Charles Brobst Premium Member over 14 years ago
But he’s still MORE innocent than King Fink!
pearlandpeach over 14 years ago
eyewitnesses are unreliable..but confessing kinda puts paid to it…
lazygrazer over 14 years ago
Yeah but can he PROVE he was wearing a mask??
EarlWash over 14 years ago
Even 2 witnesses could be coconspirators.
notinksanymore Premium Member over 14 years ago
Susan-You could never win base on just one witness. You’d need a high degree of circumstantial evidence as well. You also have to convince twelve random people that the guy did it. It’s actually better than in biblical (and in fact, Roman) times when two guys could get together, say “that guy did it” and have him put to death. You really should study the history of the law before complaining about our methods. You would be amazed.
sjoujke Premium Member over 14 years ago
I don’t think Kings have to worry about evidence circumstantial or otherwise….they’re autocrats.
boldyuma over 14 years ago
Joe Allen said “Oops!” ^…That has to be the shortest comment he’s has ever posted….LOL…
lululu9 over 14 years ago
he should be in stupidest criminals