Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:
quote:
Originally posted by Chewbacca:
quote:
Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
quote:
Originally posted by Rokenn:
In line with current US criminal procedure I will assume they are illeagal till they can prove otherwise [img]tongue.gif[/img]
|
Nice potshot, Rokenn. Unfortunately, the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply in this case.
If they enter the country without going through the proper channels, then by definition, they have entered illegally. 
[/QUOTE]So we can assume a persons legal status without proof? Innocent until proven guilty should apply, lest we deport a whole lot of "innocent" people. [/QUOTE]Innocent until proven guilty ONLY applies to trial, it does not apply to being arrested, or confined in jail and held until trial. If it did then any person holding that postion MUST demand the immedite release of Eric Scott Rudoff(sp?) and allow him to roam free until his trial. Or the release of all arrested persons until their trial comes up. Arrested and convicted are not the same thing. Breaking the law of the land is breaking the law of the land no if ands or buts. [/QUOTE]Your just mincing words here John and you missed my point. Ever hear of probable cause for arrest? Judges demand probable proof of guilt before issuing warrants, right? The burden of proof of guilt lies with the arrestor, not the arrestee from the moment a crime is committed. This way we keeep innocent people from being arrested with-out evidence.