From: Vince Brannigan
Subject: Re: [NEWS]: Probe: U.S. Knew of Jet Terror Plots
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 20:13:19 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 16:13:19 EDT
Brian Sharrock wrote:
> "Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
> > Vince Brannigan wrote:
> > :it is a difficult concept to grasp , but no, crimes in the legal sense do
> > :not exist until someone is convicted. for example
> > No, it is not a difficult concept to grasp at all. What you appear to
> > consistently miss is that this is not a court and we're not existing
> > 'in the legal sense'.
> After reading Vince's exposition of 'crime ... do not exist until someone is
> convicted ...' I now realise where I've (
> and lots of other people) have gone wrong.THe police forces are all wrong as
> their modus operandi
> seems to be 'crime reported, find villian, give to 'Justice System' to
> convict, conviction = case closed'. They're all,
> according to Vince, wrong! They should start with a conviction and worl back
> to the crime.
no. you do not find the villain. you find the "suspect" i.e. the person you
accuse of committing the crime. exactly what is the problem with calling the
person a suspect , the accused etc.
> My local constabulary was wrong too;- they gave me a 'Crime number'and they
> haven't convicted anyone for a burgulary.
> However, AFAIK, in my jurisdiction; Coroner's Courts consider facts relating
> to deaths and return verdicts of 'unlawful
> killing' , a crime, without someone being convicted.
> Vince's mileage, and erudition, may vary.
That the word criem is used by other people for other purposes does nto
affectits legal structure.