Publishing the names of the accused

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It still means getting accused of a crime is enough to spoil your prospects. Guilty or innocent doesn't matter - your life can be ruined by an accusation.

your life can always be ruined by an accusation in any system

However, the legal system is one that is looked up to more than others in terms of a crime.

I doubt you spreading rumors that I am ugly, fat, and a closet homosexual is going to ruin my life as much as a court releasing my name in a trial for embezzlement, for instance.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Those only apply to gender, orientation, religion and race. Not unproven accusations of being a vile criminal.

I'm sure its covered under some other statute. Either way, if that be the case, then the anti-discrimination laws need to be more inclusive.

Either way, I have a sense that if I went to buy a hamburger and the person said to me ''I ain't selling it to you because I think you're a FUCKING criminal''... and I took it to court, there would be some case in my favour.

No, there wouldn't be.

Refusing to sell something to you due to your character is not illegal, so they can.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Possibly, but Google searching is common among employers. Excluding employees based on accused crimes happens already.

employers hire or don't hire based on perceptions of your ability to do the job, if you've gotten into trouble with the law before, it is entirely reasonable to draw some sort of adverse inference

Hahahaha....

Oh, you were serious, let me laugh even harder:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

[Infected Mushroom]

employers hire or don't hire based on perceptions of your ability to do the job, if you've gotten into trouble with the law before, it is entirely reasonable to draw some sort of adverse inference

Hahahaha....

Oh, you were serious, let me laugh even harder:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

if you cannot accept the truth, that is not my problem

[Infected Mushroom]

your life can always be ruined by an accusation in any system

Hence why people are proposing a system where the names of the accused are withheld.

Not sure if that's the best of all possible systems, but you've demonstrated to all that it has merit.

such a system would endanger people needlessly, it is therefore infeasible

it is clear you have not been paying attention to what I have been saying, because you are misinterpreting what I have demonstrated. But I cannot expect everyone to be able to understand my logic fully.

[Infected Mushroom]

your life can always be ruined by an accusation in any system

However, the legal system is one that is looked up to more than others in terms of a crime.

I doubt you spreading rumors that I am ugly, fat, and a closet homosexual is going to ruin my life as much as a court releasing my name in a trial for embezzlement, for instance.

not really, the court told the public the truth, that the person is on trial

if people are jumping to conclusions then that is not the court's problem

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Hahahaha....

Oh, you were serious, let me laugh even harder:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

if you cannot accept the truth, that is not my problem

It's cute you say I don't accept "the truth".

Here's a question: do you have a job? Ever looked for one? Because it seems to me that you don't and you haven't, respectively.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

However, the legal system is one that is looked up to more than others in terms of a crime.

I doubt you spreading rumors that I am ugly, fat, and a closet homosexual is going to ruin my life as much as a court releasing my name in a trial for embezzlement, for instance.

not really, the court told the public the truth, that the person is on trial

if people are jumping to conclusions then that is not the court's problem

Of course it is not the court's problem, that however isn't my point.

[Donut section]

Hence why people are proposing a system where the names of the accused are withheld.

Not sure if that's the best of all possible systems, but you've demonstrated to all that it has merit.

such a system would endanger people needlessly, it is therefore infeasible

it is clear you have not been paying attention to what I have been saying, because you are misinterpreting what I have demonstrated. But I cannot expect everyone to be able to understand my logic fully.

It's not endangering anyone to any appreciable level.

[Infected Mushroom]

if you cannot accept the truth, that is not my problem

It's cute you say I don't accept "the truth".

Here's a question: do you have a job? Ever looked for one? Because it seems to me that you don't and you haven't, respectively.

are we engaged in personal attacks now?

[Infected Mushroom]

such a system would endanger people needlessly, it is therefore infeasible

it is clear you have not been paying attention to what I have been saying, because you are misinterpreting what I have demonstrated. But I cannot expect everyone to be able to understand my logic fully.

It's not endangering anyone to any appreciable level.

if my neighbour is on trial for armed robbery and he's out on bail right now, I have every right to know... even though the court has yet to rule on his final guilt (under the law)

[Donut section]

It's not endangering anyone to any appreciable level.

if my neighbour is on trial for armed robbery and he's out on bail right now, I have every right to know... even though the court has yet to rule on his final guilt (under the law)

No you don't.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It's cute you say I don't accept "the truth".

Here's a question: do you have a job? Ever looked for one? Because it seems to me that you don't and you haven't, respectively.

are we engaged in personal attacks now?

No, I am asking you because your statement that "jobs hire based on their perception of you being able of doing the job" is incredibly ignorant as to how hiring practices work, and the only way anyone can be this incredibly ignorant about hiring practices is by never being in the business world.

It's fine if you admit to not knowing how employers hire people, by the way.

[Washington Resistance Army]

are we engaged in personal attacks now?

No, I am asking you because your statement that "jobs hire based on their perception of you being able of doing the job" is incredibly ignorant as to how hiring practices work, and the only way anyone can be this incredibly ignorant about hiring practices is by never being in the business world.

I'd have a job if that's all they looked for.

[Infected Mushroom]

if my neighbour is on trial for armed robbery and he's out on bail right now, I have every right to know... even though the court has yet to rule on his final guilt (under the law)

No you don't.

I do right now because the court files are completely online (at least here in Canada). I can look up who's on Provincial Court right now, what the outcomes of previous decisions were, and what's on everyone's sentences etc

[Infected Mushroom]

are we engaged in personal attacks now?

No, I am asking you because your statement that "jobs hire based on their perception of you being able of doing the job" is incredibly ignorant as to how hiring practices work, and the only way anyone can be this incredibly ignorant about hiring practices is by never being in the business world.

It's fine if you admit to not knowing how employers hire people, by the way.

No you are making leaps of logic

[Donut section]

No you don't.

I do right now because the court files are completely online (at least here in Canada). I can look up who's on Provincial Court right now, what the outcomes of previous decisions were, and what's on everyone's sentences etc

Just because something is available doesn't mean you have the right to know it.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

No, I am asking you because your statement that "jobs hire based on their perception of you being able of doing the job" is incredibly ignorant as to how hiring practices work, and the only way anyone can be this incredibly ignorant about hiring practices is by never being in the business world.

It's fine if you admit to not knowing how employers hire people, by the way.

No you are making leaps of logic

Do you know how hiring works, yes or no?

[Pau Chiang]

I believe that until the suspect is proven guilty in a court of law, they should remain anonymous. Of course, it impossible to ensure this with high-end cases like celebrities and politicians; the press is too hungry for a juicy front pager

[Ancient Pluto]

Looking at this thread makes me wish every human being would become the victim of a serious crime, only to have no one believe them and to be falsely accused of an equally serious crime, being publicly disowned and ruined as a result. That way we'll all be traumatized into seeing it from both angles, so much so the that cognitive dissonance would rob us of all functionality as a human until we go insane from obsessing over it and want to put a bullet in our brains just to stop thinking about it so we could get some sleep for once...

Wow, I'm fucking heartless when I read/think about tough subject matters in the middle of the night.

[Infected Mushroom]

I do right now because the court files are completely online (at least here in Canada). I can look up who's on Provincial Court right now, what the outcomes of previous decisions were, and what's on everyone's sentences etc

Just because something is available doesn't mean you have the right to know it.

in this case it does, court documents are public for a reason

[Galloism]

Hence why people are proposing a system where the names of the accused are withheld.

Not sure if that's the best of all possible systems, but you've demonstrated to all that it has merit.

such a system would endanger people needlessly, it is therefore infeasible

it is clear you have not been paying attention to what I have been saying, because you are misinterpreting what I have demonstrated. But I cannot expect everyone to be able to understand my logic fully.

Actually, you've demonstrated that point quite well.

I didn't say you argued it. You demonstrated it.

It's like if someone were arguing guns were dangerous, and you were arguing to opposite, and during such argument you shot yourself in the leg.

[Ethel mermania]

The interesting thing about this conversation is that publishing the name and the crime of the accused is protection for the accused. This way they do not disappear into the night and fog. And the proceedings can be followed by the public to ensure a fair process.

[DARGLED]

Never. Only the convicted as innocence is always presumed.

[Galloism]

The interesting thing about this conversation is that publishing the name and the crime of the accused is protection for the accused. This way they do not disappear into the night and fog. And the proceedings can be followed by the public to ensure a fair process.

Arguably, we could devise a system where it's the choice of the defense.