A thing I don’t understand. Actually there are many
things I don’t understand, but this is just one of them.
I do know that in this country when accused of a crime you
are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Dzhokar Tsarnaev shuffled into a Boston courtroom the other
day and pleaded not guilty to 30 charges relating to his alleged participation
in the Boston marathon bombing.
When it is so obvious that one is involved in a crime, why
do we go through the ritual of pleading not guilty and a lengthy and costly
court trial?
I’m fairly certain I know the answer and it deals with
constitutional rights, but I'd like a legal mind to explain it more fully to
me.
The same question applies to the man who allegedly held
three women captive in his Cleveland home for nearly a decade. He pleaded not
guilty too.
Anyone?
No comments:
Post a Comment