From: "Billy Watt"
Subject: Re: [NEWS]: Probe: U.S. Knew of Jet Terror Plots
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 03:41:02 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: BT Openworld
References: <3D959025.284F175B@verizon.net> <email@example.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 03:41:02 +0000 (UTC)
In news:iA8m9.60066$bX.12653@sccrnsc02, Steve rambled thus:
> The only thing wrong with your use of this case is that it destroys
> your argument about a conviction being required for it to be a crime.
> It bolts out the guilt, and then describes how, before or after a
> conviction. So you can have a crime without a conviction, otherwise
> you could only have a pardon after the conviction.
> Thousands of crimes occur everyday and no one is arrested. That does
> not change the fact that a crime occurred.
> Lets take one of your examples about Murder, and if there was
> justification. Lets change it a little. Billy walks up and shots
> Mary in the head. Billy is examined and found to be legally
> incompetent to stand trial. No trial no conviction, Billy is in the
> nut house Mary is dead. There was no justification, no
> accident(manslaughter), no legal defenses to Murder. We don't even go
> to the issue of Not Guilty be reason of insanity because of the
> incompetent he never even goes to trial. Does that mean no crime. I
> don't think so.
This is a very nicely put arguement but I don't know anybody called Mary.