Hi, Just to add clarification: Locke-ian philosophy posits innocent until proven guilty. Napoleonic posits guilty until proven innocent. Both systems of justice are currently in practice in various parts of the world. The United States is founded on the Locke-ian philosophy which is the one I am personally more comfortable with.
To save you some reading: The Hatfield-Mccoy feud took place in Appalachia in the United States at the time of and right after the American Civil War. It became iconic for Americans for conflicts involving family and revenge killings. Thanks, Bob Cavanaugh -----Original Message----- From: Gnupg-users [mailto:gnupg-users-boun...@gnupg.org] On Behalf Of MFPA Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 8:05 PM To: Robert J. Hansen on GnuPG-Users Subject: Re: Thoughts on Keybase * PGP Signed by an unknown key Hi On Wednesday 7 January 2015 at 3:27:10 AM, in <mid:9a642d95-c400-442f-b952-639b7f848...@sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > Unfortunately, unless you’re psychic this is > impossible. You don’t know what information will be > relevant. You’ll never discover “the dead guy spilled > a hot coffee all over the other guy yesterday, and they > had an argument, and the guy said he was going to kill > him for spilling coffee” unless you interview the > barista where the shooter had a cup of coffee > yesterday. Aside from only demonstrating possible earlier intent rather later actions, the fraction of comments of "I'll kill you" that actually convert to murders is vanishingly small. If I were a juror, this evidence would tell me nothing about guilt or otherwise. > The police’s job isn’t just to see whether a person > fired the gun; it’s also to determine why, and whether > more crimes are likely connected. I'm not sure the "why" matters, unless for mitigation. But connected crimes makes sense. > If the dead guy is > named McCoy and the living one is named Hatfield, > that’s a strong hint the death is connected to a blood > feud and the police need to be on the lookout for > revenge killings. The reference is lost on me. Neither is exactly an uncommon name. > Only true in certain countries. I read recently that under Napoleonic law in France, the accused has to disprove state accusations. But I never gave it any credence. > Not a privacy invasion, since that’s a public record. CRB checks (in the UK) also include non-public records held by police forces and other organisations. And of course it is a privacy invasion to go delving into records of past events if the subject has not shared them with you and does not generally broadcast them. When the penalty has been paid, the debt to society is discharged and it is no longer anybody else's business. -- Best regards MFPA mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-gro...@riseup.net Put knot yore trust inn spel chequers * Unknown Key * 0x1AF778E4(L) _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
