CreateDebate


Debate Info

9
9
The state You do
Debate Score:18
Arguments:19
Total Votes:22
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 The state (6)
 
 You do (4)

Debate Creator

excon(4266) pic



If you're charged with a crime, does the state have to prove its case, or do you??

The state

Side Score: 9
VS.

You do

Side Score: 9
3 points

The term "Innocent until proven guilty" says it all..................

Side: The state
outlaw60(8861) Clarified
0 points

"The term "Innocent until proven guilty" says it all.................."

So that is how it works Crazy AL ? You only have one problem AL Hillary lost the election and as far as you Regressives are concerned Trump colluded with the Russians so where does your "term" start and end ?

Side: The state
AlofRI(1835) Clarified
1 point

Hopefully, it started when 45 talked with the Russians and ends when he is proven guilty ... also, hopefully, before he brings America DOWN!

Side: The state
AlofRI(1835) Clarified
1 point

It ends when and IF he is proven guilty, I think that's what I said, isn't it?? What has that got to do with Hillary losing the election? Apparently YOU are still not sure she did, you keep bringing it up!

He is NOT guilty at the moment, He is STILL President ... couldn't be clearer!

Why don't you grow up and stop making up these things you come up with? You seem obsessed with calling people names, guess I'll have to get one for YOU though it will bring me down to your level ... let's see ... SCUM seems to fit, as long as I'm "Crazy Al" you are SCUM, Okay?

Your friend;

Crazy Al

Side: The state
2 points

The state does. If they are going to accuse you of doing something that is wrong, the onus is on them to prove it. Otherwise they can go around accusing everyone of stealing something and it's up to you to prove you didn't. That's asinine. The accuser must prove the accusation.

Side: The state
1 point

The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you are responsible.

Side: The state
1 point

It depends on which nation you live in but in the USA the burden of proof is heavier on the state.

The exception would be if you know you're from a social group which historically is at a big disadvantage in the courts, and then you may have to overperform to win your innocence and release. And you may think I mean this as a racial thing but it could also simply be that you're disadvantaged in that particular case or courtroom. Consider just for a funny example the big city white kids in the My Cousin Vinny movie. There are times and places and scenarios where you know you have to go above and beyond or else you're probably screwed.

Side: The state
1 point

Our law says that you ARE innocent until you are proven guilty. This really shouldn't be a question. If someone accuses me of murder, you can't throw me in prison unless I defend myself well. Its your job to make sure I did it and prove your case. If you have evidence/something persuasive, then I should start to have to defend not the other way around

Side: The state
2 points

That's a typical stupidly misworded question which only a bat-shit crazy racist Bongo could make.

Read and interpret the literal meaning of your own question there Bongo.

What you're literally asking is, does the state have to prove the charges it made against you, or do you have to prove it for them, and and by doing so, convict yourself?

Side: You do
excon(4266) Disputed
1 point

Hello Antrim:

I see you didn't understand my question.. Next time I'll use smaller words.

excon

Side: The state
2 points

Normally, I would answer the opposition; however, everyone in this debate know as well as I do that this is not the case, regardless of what is documented and presented. The state sends away innocent people on a regular basis. In 2001, a soldier named James Doyle was convicted of raping a trainee at Ft. Leonard Wood, MO, due to the similar build and tattoo of an attacker in the middle of the night. The DNA proved his innocence, yet he was still convicted and served time for a crime he never committed. Things like this are not a rare happenstance and don't happen exclusively to any race or culture, but it's just another example of the federal government proving itself to be, in all reality, above the standard of the burden of proof falling on the accuser.

Side: You do

In this particular case, you, Excon, will have to explain why you are wearing black and white jail stripes prior to being caught.

Side: You do
1 point

ROTFFLMMFAO being you are a 74 year old EXCON business person from Seattle who rents from a landlord the STATE proved it's case but YOU couldn't ! So what is your question SUPER STUPID ?

Side: You do