Re: DNA was: Re: Students Want Chance To Defend Themselves

<gfnaame2@nospam.net> wrote in message news:jiJOj.255$Y81.18@trndny09...
>
>
> Show us a section of LAW (you know what that is right dumbass?) that
> states, as you right wing numb nuts claim -->that "juries" decide what is
> "reasonable."

It is not law we are looking at, it is reasoning and critical thinking as 
taught in philosphy.

Premises:
1.  In major cases, a jury is selected from the citizenry and each juror is 
questioned to determine his or her fitness to sit, i.e. that he or she meets 
the legal ideal of a reasonable person. (I admit that mileage will vary highly 
with jurisdiction.)
2. The jury hears relevant evidence.
3. It deliberates in order to produce findings.
4. The bench may instruct the jury to find specifically one way or another.
5. The jury is not bound by the instructions and finds as it believes it must.

Conclusion: Therefore, the jury, in determining what to find, determines what 
is reasonable in a case.

> If you can't then you will have proven in public that you are another
> right wing idiot with a computer.

Two out of three is pretty good for a sleepy Sunday morning. I have a computer 
and may even be an idiot -- imagine my surprise! -- but right-wing is 
something I certainly am not. I am a liberal (gentle readers, please note the 
lower case "L", especially if you're Canadian).
-- 
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)