"Does justice always prevail"?.....The general consensus was that it doesn't. So if the McCanns are found guilty or not guilty would you believe it or not?
2007-09-19 21:37:28 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
this is my first and last question about the McCanns.....
2007-09-19 21:39:03 · update #1
please answer the question! Would you believe the final decision or not?
2007-09-19 21:47:57 · update #2
my personal gut instinct is that they have something to do with her disappearance...but to answer your question...if someone is found not guilty does that always mean they definitely didnt do it? of course not! It just means that there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that they are guilty...so even if they are found not guilty, without evidence of another guilty party i will always be a little doubtful.
2007-09-19 21:44:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
I think there will always be a doubt! Some people will say yes! Be it they have been found innocent or guilty if others will still feel that Justice didn't prevail because they have a strong feeling that! Judgement should have gone the other way.
To me it would be a case of saying OK either way because the jury wouldn't decide anything until they had all the evidence, full proofs, heard what the Mc Canns had to say etc so i would view their decision as the right one. Then again ... And depending on decision ... If it went to an appeal ... You know! O golly i hope not.
2007-09-20 04:44:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Unless we get a full statement of the investigation and the answers the McCanns gave to the police, also that of their friends I wouldn't believe a word.
They guilty in the eyes of decent human beings of neglecting their three children, yet they think they have done no wrong, so if they get off with this Scot free most people will think that they both have got away with murder.
Richard Branson is the only recent person to go public with his offer for £100,000
for legal expenses anyone who knows or has followed his story must know he is as dodgy as hell, ie fixing air fares along with b.a, also that carry on about his sexual assault on a member of his staff.
What's the saying? Birds of a feather.
2007-09-20 04:51:38 · answer #3 · answered by st.abbs 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Decision is based on the presented supporting facts & explanation rather than the actual truth. Most of the time, the facts come closer to the truth & proper judgment is done. At times, it is other way round. Let us hope justice & peace prevail on earth.
2007-09-20 04:45:26 · answer #4 · answered by Smiling_Umesh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If someone is found not guilty it is usually because the prosecution couldn't prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Doesn't necessarily mean they are innocent, just means they can't be proved guilty. I'm more inclined to believe a 'guilty' verdict because it means that PROOF has been used. You don't have to prove innocence, just guilt. So if they are found not guilty, they didn't necessarily have to prove it.
2007-09-20 05:23:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anya 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We on earth have a change to make people pay for the crimes they do, but when it comes to judgment day, GOD is the one who will have the final say and HE will judge them accordingly.
So if not on earth, then in heaven, justice will be done!!!
Everyone must meet their maker some day....
2007-09-20 04:45:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Don't think so maybe the main reason would be something called lawyers...
2007-09-20 05:06:24 · answer #7 · answered by Tim 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I just want to see them in the dock for child neglect - where it goes then does not matter. They will have been brought to court - Publicly and formally!
2007-09-20 04:47:14 · answer #8 · answered by Van der Elst 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
It would all depend on the "significan't evidence" for or against them, presented.
As it is, there is no proof against them at all.
2007-09-20 04:45:13 · answer #9 · answered by Faith 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋