h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Ok - let me put this another way. I have no right to be the judge of someone's guilt or otherwise outside the judicial process. If I were to imprison OJ because I thought he was guilty that would be false imprisonment. If, between us, we imprisoned him because we thought he was guilty that would be false imprisonment. If we got a majority of the worlds citizens to agree that they all thought he was guilty and imprisoned him on that basis it would still be false imprisonment.

I never suggested that we should imprison him. He had his trial, and he was acquitted. It doesn't change the identity of the person who sliced the throat of Ron Goldman and Nichole Simpson.

My major issue is that the legal system is one way of exploring reality. We should use it as a way to examine things that have happened, but it isn't the only way. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a very high standard. Furthermore, you have to get 12 people to agree to it. That's a lot of work. Sometimes the evidence isn't there to prove the truth to the jury. Of course, sometimes the truth is that the person is innocent.

Just because we've made courts to sort out thorny issues for us, doesn't deprive us of the right of examining issues and coming to our own conclusions.

Pardon me for butting into a dead conversation, but it seems to me that a trial before the World Court does not hold any fear for those who violate human rights, commit mass murder, or anything else. Right now, Slobodan Milosevic is before the Hague and is making a mockery of his entire trial. Despite being fluent in English, he's claiming that any court procedings in that language are violating his right to a fair trial. Now everything's being translated into Serbian, and he's having problems with that as well. Since the Sept. 11 attacks took place on American soil, why not try bin Laden in our country? We cannot pander to those who claim he would get an unfair trial in an "infidel" country--whoever made the point earlier that any Islamic court who tried him would be seen as a pawn of Western Imperialism is correct.

I think the Lockerbie trial should have been held in the United Kingdom too, but oh well...

This post has been removed.

It's hard to tell the bullpucky from the facts. Pictures of "smart bombs" hitting Taliban tanks and military installations have gone through numerous levels of government censorship before they're aired at the press conferences. Here in the States, Department of Defense officials refuse to give any details on specific military actions, so it is hard to tell exactly what is going on. On the other side, Taliban officials are claiming large civilian casualities. Considering that first the Taliban said bin Laden wasn't in Afghanistan, then he was, then they didn't know where, then they did...well, you can't believe what they say either.