The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most ISP NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Keith Willshaw"
Subject: Re: [NEWS]: Probe: U.S. Knew of Jet Terror Plots
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 07:26:08 +0100
References: <3D959025.284F175B@verizon.net> <email@example.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 06:26:05 +0000 (UTC)
"Steve" wrote in message
> > I agree with Vince in so far as it takes a court judgement
> > to decide a crime has been committed but disagree if he
> > insists that only a trial in a criminal court can decide that.
> > However its clear that a criminal court has the final
> > word. Say for example that the coroners court declares
> > a averdict of unlawful killing, a defendant is arrested and put
> > on trial and is acquitted on the grounds of self defense.
> > In that case no crime was committed despite the
> > finding of the coroners court.
> > Keith
> This means the Court made a finding of an individuals legal guilt or lack
> proof thereof.
No sir read it again
> It does not alter the facts.
Quite true. The 'fact' is still that a man is dead but the court has
decided that the act of killing was lawful and not a crime.
> I think the main argument has
> been, the old if a tree falls and no one is there does it make a noise.
> no one witnesses the event and no court ever has a hearing or trial does
> change the fact that a crime occurred. Vince maintains no crime. I
> a crime occurred for which no conviction was had.
On the contrary in the example I quoted no crime would have
been committed if the court found that the accused acted
in self defense. The coroners court made an error and should
have brought in a finding of justifiable homicide.
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of