Our Country

Discussion in 'The Refreshment Lounge' started by MikeS2942, Jul 23, 2013.

  1. MikeS2942

    MikeS2942 Registered User

    For centuries our forefathers have set in place a system where men are tried by a group of their piers. In today's society if we do not like the decision that was made by this group, we protest, defame the name of those that made the decisions, regroup and get another trial all because we do not like the final decision. It was always my understanding that if a man is found innocent he was set free, not charged for civil rights violations, sued beyond any extent possible, and defamed. In our society today it has become a part of our fabric to retry civilians until we think we get it right.

    Why cant this stop? It has no purpose in our society to retry people because the jury's decision wasn't what we wanted to hear.
  2. MightyMouse

    MightyMouse Registered User

    Couple things....no man is found "innocent" by a jury of his peers. He is found "not guilty." There's a profound difference between the two.

    Furthermore, the situation which you allude to proved to be a possible civil rights violation in that the young man was profiled, surveilled from a place of cover/concealment, and then confronted by someone who was not an officer of the law. This was predicated, more than likely, based on his race. Given the surface facts, that may very well be a violation of his civil rights.

    Just to draw another parallel to a case where someone was convicted before trial, sued civilly, and defamed beyond repair...was your outrage this ever present in the mid 90s when Orenthal James Simpson went through his original trial for the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson?

    ST Kendall Lodge #109
    Kabul, Afghanistan

    OES: Ray of Hope #44
    Kabul, Afghanistan

Share My Freemasonry