Your belief is not evidence.
Not in a straight line maybe, but yes, it worked just fine. Justice for everyone, including the corrupt DA. It doesn’t get better than that.
The problem is this:
I have no doubt that all of them honestly believed they were acting righteously - because that’s how the system works, from their perspective. Two different district attorneys agreed.
Only because of luck and social pressure did it “work” in this case.
This sort of resolution is the aberration.
Why not? We were told antifa is just an idea.
But no, the system is the planned distribution of authority and control. Switching out inadequate people for capable, honest people isn’t necessarily changing the system itself…unless you have a method in the system to always find the best people (once you define “best”). That has not been done yet or utopia would have been reached.
I don’t understand what this is supposed to mean.
The people are the system.
People haven’t changed much in several thousand years…and are not likely to do so soon.
No, I changed my mind. I don’t agree.
Yes, it was lucky that these idiots had videoed their own crime. (Just as it was lucky that Rittenhouse’s defense of his life was videoed.) Many crimes go unpunished because there is no evidence. But convicting people without evidence is less just than letting them go for lack of evidence. Innocent until proven guilty is not just a clever slogan. It’s a cornerstone of our justice system.
I certainly hope you are not advocating doing away with that principle.
What would you do about that? How would you change the system so that that could not happen?
That’s not the problem. The evidence has always been there. This was “investigated” by the system - and no one was charged.
Until the story broke nationwide.
There’s no magic solution. I don’t have an answer.
My post was in the hypothetical … what would have happened if there was no video? What other evidence existed that could have been used to indict them, let alone convict them?
Then what are you complaining about?
Even without the video, police had more than enough evidence to arrest them at the scene - and would almost certainly have done so, had not the county DA called them at the scene and told them not to arrest the McMichaels.
It wasn’t the video that convicted them.
Like what?
How can you say that the video was not the key to conviction?
Their statements to the cops. As caught on camera.
Their testimony was in concert with the video. Without the video, they could have told any story they wanted to tell.
There were no real material facts in dispute, in this case.
Because it wasn’t. Have you followed the case?
If you believe the system is people, then just say this was investigated by people until the story broke nationwide. No need to call people “the system”.
