The bleated ape-call of the average American Idiot White Man is that "you are presumed innocent until proven guilty." These people are very very very adamant about this. These people - even if they are not remotely involved in government chores and tasks and paperwork and stealing time on the time-clock - will get very very angry if you - before the jury has rendered a verdict - if you declare "guilty" or "not guilty" on someone heading for trial or already on trial. These people do not want you having an opinion on someone else's culpability in a legal matter, especially if it's a capital crime. "We don't know, we weren't there, we have to give him his day in court. We have to ASSUME he is innocent."
Meanwhile the fucker's in jail. Someone thinks he's guilty.
There is nothing in the constitution regarding the presumption of innocence. Most of the "rights" in the bill of rights have to do with you getting arrested: what needs to happen before you are arrested and what may or may not happen after you are arrested. The preumption of innocence anywhere at all in the constitution is a needle you can hunt for if you want to, but I left that foolish search long ago.
It's basically - the assumption of innocence until proven guilty or words to that effect, or attitude to that effect, or unicorn to that effect - it's basically a tradition that came from, I believe, ancient ancient ancient ancient Rome. Washington DC does a lot of things ancient Rome did, including but not limited to architectural design, because……actually I have no idea why DC imitates Rome. Probably it's because modern bureaucrats revere ancient bureaucrats since they both are like kin-assholes separated only by time. The kinship of assholeship, a thicker bond than the bond of blood and a species that never varies or undergoes alteration or mutation down through the epochs of time.
The presumption of innocence, not being actually articulated anywhere in the constitution is, then, basically a custom. It's the custom in American jurisprudence and cracker barrel blathering, both of which are synonymous, to say the arrested guy locked up in a concrete cell is presumed innocent until the jury comes back and says he is not innocent anymore he is guilty. What the imprisoned innocent man thinks about all this "assuming" is never considered by anyone. He is the least important person in the debate.
Where this is all going is, "innocent until proven guilty"is merely a saying. It's a saying that those involved in the arrest and incarceration of the people paying them permit to persist since it does no real harm: it's not anything defined in the legalese and in fact it is completely facetious: if you are arrested then you are guilty as far as the arresting officers and the people at the jail and the guy who schedules trials is concerned. If the idiot general public - and this would be you, sir - want to go around blubbering "He's innocent until proven guilty, goddammit!" that's fine, you go right ahead, you just keep saying that proudly while we in the various departments of "justice" smile and laugh at you quietly amongst ourselves.
Also, regarding this "until proven innocent" business……defendants are never proven innocent or proven guilty. They are pronounced innocent or pronounced guilty. Reality and facts are not an issue. And this is not sarcasm, what I am now saying here, it's just a truth. A simple truth. Guilt and innocence is never an issue for the Law. Only a pronouncement or a declaration of either by someone authorized to make such a declaration. And it is not you, usually. Even though you might have shouted "Innocent until proven guilty!" a thousand times through a megaphone. As far as the law is concerned he is neither innocent or guilty, he is just arrested or released. Guilt or innocence is not a factor. He is either in jail, or temporarily in abeyance due to having paid a time-purchase called a "ransom," or he is "free" to be arrested later for a different reason. Not the same reason. A different one. And there are thousands, maybe millions of things you as an American can do that can legally result in your arrest.
To review, "you are presumed innocent until proven guilty" is not a constitutional edict. It is a - I dont want to say a wives tale - it is an urban myth. Giving it a maximum of courtesy, it is a useful misleading custom that is encouraged by the State. Like most thing Americans think are constitutional and aren't, this is one of them.
Feeling stupid yet? You read this entire blog, you will. For one reason or another. And that's its magic!
No comments:
Post a Comment