FA+
Shop
The Court of Public Opinion is now in session.
12 years ago
General
Start Here
So let's review what we know. Someone said that someone did something bad, and because of the popular opinion concerning that bad thing, everyone jumps to conclusions and assumes that it must be true, so they immediately express their support for one side, and their contempt for the other party. To hell with the respective authorities or legal system. To hell with the actual, physical evidence. To hell with the fact that we don't really know what happened. Someone accused them of something, so it must be true.
Right?
Let's look at some other cases where the Court of Public Opinion over-ruled the legal verdict:
the George Zimmerman case
the Casey Anthony case
the Duke University lacrosse team case
the O. J. Simpson case
Now, you might be thinking to yourself, "Great examples. We all know all those people are guilty." But consider this: how many of them were convicted, legally? The key thing to keep in mind here is that some or all of them may have in fact done the things they were accused of. However, there was insufficient evidence to formally convict them.
So before you all get up in arms and start forming lynch mobs and going on witch hunts, do yourselves one huge favor: get your facts straight first.
I also need to say that I personally don't support either side in the current issue for several reasons. First, and most importantly, it doesn't affect me. I have other things in my life that I need to worry about. Second, I don't have all the available information, and therefore am unable to make an informed decision regarding the events in question. And even if I did have all the appropriate information, I still wouldn't be able to say for certain that I knew what happened. This brings us to my third point: I wasn't there at the time, so no matter what anyone says, I'll never know exactly how things happened. Sure, we can be all like "Well, here's the evidence, and based on that, here's the most likely explanation." But even that is an educated guess as to the events that transpired.
In conclusion, I am hereby politely asking everyone to shut the hell up about it already. Thank you.
Right?
Let's look at some other cases where the Court of Public Opinion over-ruled the legal verdict:
the George Zimmerman case
the Casey Anthony case
the Duke University lacrosse team case
the O. J. Simpson case
Now, you might be thinking to yourself, "Great examples. We all know all those people are guilty." But consider this: how many of them were convicted, legally? The key thing to keep in mind here is that some or all of them may have in fact done the things they were accused of. However, there was insufficient evidence to formally convict them.
So before you all get up in arms and start forming lynch mobs and going on witch hunts, do yourselves one huge favor: get your facts straight first.
I also need to say that I personally don't support either side in the current issue for several reasons. First, and most importantly, it doesn't affect me. I have other things in my life that I need to worry about. Second, I don't have all the available information, and therefore am unable to make an informed decision regarding the events in question. And even if I did have all the appropriate information, I still wouldn't be able to say for certain that I knew what happened. This brings us to my third point: I wasn't there at the time, so no matter what anyone says, I'll never know exactly how things happened. Sure, we can be all like "Well, here's the evidence, and based on that, here's the most likely explanation." But even that is an educated guess as to the events that transpired.
In conclusion, I am hereby politely asking everyone to shut the hell up about it already. Thank you.
