
In the United States people accused of a crime are considered innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof falls on the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
accused has
committed a crime. Clearly this is a
benefit to a person
accused of a crime. If the situation were reversed
(as it is in many countries around the world) guilty until proven innocent, the
benefit would be on the side of the government and not the individual. Martin L. in Period 1 came up with the following question:
Is the system of due process a good one for all of society? In other words are you comfortable with the possibility of allowing a person who
had committed a crime walk free, because of reasonable doubt, or is it harder to accept placing an innocent man behind bars to protect against reasonable doubt? Thoughts...