In a criminal court no one is ever found innocent. They are either found GUILTY or NOT GUILTY. For someone to be found guilty the proceutor has to present evidence that proves beyond a resonable doubt that the defendant comitted the crime. If they can not provide that level of evidence (which is called the burden of proof), then the defendant walks, even if they actually did it. The reason he was found liable in civil court is because the burden of proof is lower (I believe the wording is something along the lines of more likely than not). So to sum it up for you INNOCENT and NOT GUILTY are not the same thing in a criminal court.
??? what are you talking about ???
why are you telling me how the process works???
and are you suggesting the jurys verdict doesnt mean anything???
In a criminal court no one is ever found innocent. They are either found GUILTY or NOT GUILTY. For someone to be found guilty the proceutor has to present evidence that proves beyond a resonable doubt that the defendant comitted the crime. If they can not provide that level of evidence (which is called the burden of proof), then the defendant walks, even if they actually did it. The reason he was found liable in civil court is because the burden of proof is lower (I believe the wording is something along the lines of more likely than not). So to sum it up for you INNOCENT and NOT GUILTY are not the same thing in a criminal court.
we are not in a court right now.. and I have watched enough court cases to know the jury or the judge does not stand up and say the defendant is found innocent... lol... im simply saying that the definition of innocent means not guilty....
we are not in a court right now.. and I have watched enough court cases to know the jury or the judge does not stand up and say the defendant is found innocent... lol... im simply saying that the definition of innocent means not guilty....
But that is not the correct definition. All "Not Guilty" means is that in the jury's opinion the prosecutor did not provide enough evidence to prove murder. That is all they are deciding on. It is not like they are saying, no OJ didn't do it someone else did, which would be the definition of innocent.
But that is not the correct definition. All "Not Guilty" means is that in the jury's opinion the prosecutor did not provide enough evidence to prove murder. That is all they are deciding on. It is not like they are saying, no OJ didn't do it someone else did, which would be the definition of innocent.
see what you are doing... I am saying Innocent means not guilty and than you say... NOT GUILTY means whatever... why are you trying to fool unsuspecting people... is has nothing to do with the prosecutor either... you are putting opinions in the jurys head Kel..... When you are presented evidence in any way and are left to determine whether or not enough the evidence at hand is enough to convict a person on trial... you are in FACT and REALITY determining whether or not this person is GUILTY or NOT GUILTY... Its guilty beyond a reasonable doubt... so a NOT GUILTY verdict means that the person has been determined innocent of the accusations against him. YOU CANT BE TRIALED FOR THE SAME THING TWICE...
OJ SIMPSON WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF THOSE CRIMES.... which means as a citizen I must put aside my opinions and prejudices and treat him as an innocent person. OTHER WISE I WOULDNT BELIEVE IN THE COURT SYSTEM... which is another argument Kel....
When I say the definition of Innocent means not guilty and you respond as if I am saying a Not Guilty verdict means he is an innocent makes you look like you don't understand the concepts.
But that is not the correct definition. All "Not Guilty" means is that in the jury's opinion the prosecutor did not provide enough evidence to prove murder. That is all they are deciding on. It is not like they are saying, no OJ didn't do it someone else did, which would be the definition of innocent.
While you are correct about the definition of "not guilty," one is still innocent until proven guilty, which is why I can see why someone would use the two terms synonymously.
While you are correct about the definition of "not guilty," one is still innocent until proven guilty, which is why I can see why someone would use the two terms synonymously.
Bingo.....And an innocent man "not guilty" just got railroaded in Nevada.
I'm not saying for sure he was innocent, because i wasn't an eye witness. But according to the law of the land he was not guilty.
And everything about this new case is seriously messed up. I hope he gets off on appeals.
Comments
??? what are you talking about ???
why are you telling me how the process works???
and are you suggesting the jurys verdict doesnt mean anything???
we are not in a court right now.. and I have watched enough court cases to know the jury or the judge does not stand up and say the defendant is found innocent... lol... im simply saying that the definition of innocent means not guilty....
But that is not the correct definition. All "Not Guilty" means is that in the jury's opinion the prosecutor did not provide enough evidence to prove murder. That is all they are deciding on. It is not like they are saying, no OJ didn't do it someone else did, which would be the definition of innocent.
see what you are doing... I am saying Innocent means not guilty and than you say... NOT GUILTY means whatever... why are you trying to fool unsuspecting people... is has nothing to do with the prosecutor either... you are putting opinions in the jurys head Kel..... When you are presented evidence in any way and are left to determine whether or not enough the evidence at hand is enough to convict a person on trial... you are in FACT and REALITY determining whether or not this person is GUILTY or NOT GUILTY... Its guilty beyond a reasonable doubt... so a NOT GUILTY verdict means that the person has been determined innocent of the accusations against him. YOU CANT BE TRIALED FOR THE SAME THING TWICE...
OJ SIMPSON WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF THOSE CRIMES.... which means as a citizen I must put aside my opinions and prejudices and treat him as an innocent person. OTHER WISE I WOULDNT BELIEVE IN THE COURT SYSTEM... which is another argument Kel....
When I say the definition of Innocent means not guilty and you respond as if I am saying a Not Guilty verdict means he is an innocent makes you look like you don't understand the concepts.
Bingo.....And an innocent man "not guilty" just got railroaded in Nevada.
I'm not saying for sure he was innocent, because i wasn't an eye witness. But according to the law of the land he was not guilty.
And everything about this new case is seriously messed up. I hope he gets off on appeals.