Warp wrote:
>   I don't think crime is a matter of opinion. (At least not in most cases.)

I think if it's not a matter of opinion, then it wouldn't likely go to a 
trial in the first place.

Here's an example of a case I was almost on, as explained by the judge 
before the jury selection, meaning that nobody was really arguing over 
these facts: Military man gets a ride home with two ladies he met at the 
base. They stop at one lady's house to take care of something, leaving 
him in the car. A few minutes later, he comes in looking for a glass of 
water. Ladies are in bed, invites him to join her, they do their thing, 
go on their way happily, all three together in the same car, drive him 
home, drop him off. Husband comes home six months later to find his wife 
six months pregnant. OK, now she claims she's been raped. Plus, the guy 
came into her house without an invitation, so that's breaking and 
entering plus burglary. Plus, she got pregnant, which is "grave bodily 
harm." Which means he's up for life in prison.  Makes sense yet? 
Technically, if all that's true, he did commit a felony leading to grave 
bodily injury by joining her in bed for her invitation, except she 
didn't bother to report it until a year after it happened.

So, would you want that left up to the judge?

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message