If the Law is Innocent until proven guilty, why do we lock people in cages until they prove they are innocent?
2007-06-25 00:18:18 · 10 answers · asked by Paybackisamofo 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
Well Gee dr. Crow, If I said you were a child molester, but you werent, would you like me to lock you in a cage until you can PROVE your arent? Probally not huh?!
2007-06-25 00:26:42 · update #1
Wait!!!! I Have the real answer. If you have Money or Power, you ARE innocent until proven guilty. If your broke, you ARE guilty until proven Innocent. Tell me Im wrong, I dare you!
2007-06-25 00:31:41 · update #2
if you have money your ok
2007-06-25 00:21:57 · answer #1 · answered by panther_nut 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are still innocent until proven guilty. Just being held in jail doesn't make you guilty. That is why there are trials and why we have the bail system. This business about money has some merit but there are lot of people who are released ROR too. If there is enough info to say you are likely to flee or harm another then I am glad that they are put in jail awaiting trial.
Do you want to be the person making the decision to let everyone out who is accused of a crime and then be the person to tell a parent or loved one, oh yeah we had him arrested but let him out - just because it appears he may have killed three other people he hasn't been found guilty - sorry for your loss.
There is a duty to protect the public also.
2007-06-25 04:18:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not everyone is kept in jail until trial. A judge determines whether bail will be set and how much.
It's really based on the seriousness of the crime, the chance the person will re-offend while awaiting trial, and the odds they will show up for trial. Bail would be set lower for a first time offender because they are less likely to re-offend while they are waiting for trial. Bail would be set lower for a shoplifter than an armed robber. Someone who owns a house is less likely to leave town while awaiting trial than someone who has a history of moving often.
2007-06-25 00:28:12 · answer #3 · answered by Dona A 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You are innocent of the crime for which you are being tried until proven guilty. You can be locked up to prevent you committing another one. If you think that is unjust, your lawyer has the chance to use the 'habeas corpus' Act to release you.
2016-03-03 02:06:28 · answer #4 · answered by Guru Hank 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since money determines whether you make bail and how good your attorney is, then I would agree that the rich are innocent until proven guilty and the poor are guilty until proven innocent.
2007-06-25 00:37:19 · answer #5 · answered by Monk 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
"Innocent until proven guilty" is a catch-phrase to make the CJS more palatable. It's common knowledge that state attorneys and cops will do almost anything for a conviction, truth be damned.
2007-06-25 00:27:00 · answer #6 · answered by Zombie 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Innocent until proven guilty is now just a "cliche" in this country.
The proper phrase is "guilty until proven innocent."
Anyone who argues this has never been in our Judicial system. . .
2007-06-25 00:31:47 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because it is their job to protect society until they can find out for sure. Would you rather they detain the person in your child's bedroom for the day/night?
2007-06-25 00:22:41 · answer #8 · answered by I hate Comcast 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The world is an ironic place...
2007-06-25 00:21:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Aha, you noticed that! But, that's only when they are poor or not as wealthy as those who feel themselves more protected on the other side of those 'secure' walls.
2007-06-25 00:21:21 · answer #10 · answered by Ben 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋