User Controls
Feral nigger throws 8 year old boy into train (Germany)
-
2019-07-29 at 6:43 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 6:43 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 6:50 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 6:51 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 6:53 PM UTCLOL where in the story does it say they had so many seconds to get the hell out of the way. If she had enough time to save herself she had as much time to save the child
-
2019-07-29 at 6:53 PM UTCI know bad things happen, but it is worth staying the course, in 100 years time Germany will be a beautiful brown country, which makes all of this worthwhile.
-
2019-07-29 at 6:56 PM UTC
Originally posted by itybit LOL where in the story does it say they had so many seconds to get the hell out of the way. If she had enough time to save herself she had as much time to save the child
LOL, where in the story does it say the child landed close enough to her for her to grab as she jumped to safety? -
2019-07-29 at 6:57 PM UTCYou have a point I assumed if she was a responsible mother with a child of that age on a crowded platform she would have ahold of the childs hand
-
2019-07-29 at 7:24 PM UTCThey should put on the child's gravestone, "Mommy Let Me Get Run Over By the Big Train".
-
2019-07-29 at 7:25 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 7:29 PM UTC
Originally posted by itybit You have a point I assumed if she was a responsible mother with a child of that age on a crowded platform she would have ahold of the childs hand
Being shoved.... Was she shoved first? Was the child shoved first? If you were shoved in front of train while holding a child's hand would you maintain grip or not? I don't know as I've never had that happen. There are factors the story can't convey to make a judgment on the mother. -
2019-07-29 at 7:30 PM UTCITT: we excuse the mother's actions/inactions
-
2019-07-29 at 7:32 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 7:35 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 7:42 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 7:46 PM UTC
-
2019-07-29 at 7:53 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL If there's direct evidence, like fingerprints/DNA/multiple eyewitnesses, confession, then the presumption of innocence should be reversed, and the onus placed on the accused to prove his innocence.
In that case why even have a trial if you have fingerprints? If someone is presumed guilty why fuss things up with a pesky trial and slow the wheels of justice. Hell we can just replace the blind justice with the scales things with a fucking guy on a steamroller roller peaking through his fingers looking for fingerprints.IN 1984 KIRK BLOODSWORTH was convicted of the rape and murder of a nine-year-old girl and sentenced to the gas chamber—an outcome that rested largely on the testimony of five eyewitnesses. After Bloodsworth served nine years in prison, DNA testing proved him to be innocent. Such devastating mistakes by eyewitnesses are not rare…
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/ -
2019-07-29 at 8:07 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker In that case why even have a trial if you have fingerprints? If someone is presumed guilty why fuss things up with a pesky trial and slow the wheels of justice. Hell we can just replace the blind justice with the scales things with a fucking guy on a steamroller roller peaking through his fingers looking for fingerprints.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
I meant when everything points to the guilt, like DNA, combined with fingerprints, combined with eyewitnesses. That's direct evidence. And I said the onus reverses, not that he's automatically guilty. -
2019-07-29 at 8:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL I meant when everything points to the guilt, like DNA, combined with fingerprints, combined with eyewitnesses. That's direct evidence. And I said the onus reverses, not that he's automatically guilty.
How do you establish that "evidence" without a trial? Who determines if the evidence is "direct"? -
2019-07-29 at 8:17 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker How do you establish that "evidence" without a trial? Who determines if the evidence is "direct"?
You don't need a trial for evidence, evidence comes before a trial. If it's credible evidence the trial will take place, if it's not it wont. The Grand Jury look at the evidence before indicting.