On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 00:19 +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 09:33:23PM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > * Adrian Bunk <b...@stusta.de> [101111 19:40]: > > > The level of proof required at court is not that extremely high, and > > > if you don't reach that level of proof there's a high probability > > > that the person is not guilty. > > > > Almost every juristdiction has some "without reasonable doubt" in it. > > Puting people into jail or requesting fines in something serious. > > Telling someone "Sorry, but after what happened and while the > > authorities said there is not enough proof, we do not want other > > attendees having to fear you. Would you mind leaving/not coming?" > > (and formulating that more decided if not followed voluntary) is > > something that does not need as much proof.
> I don't like this "we have no proof but think you are guilty" attitude > that has a high probability of also hitting innocent people. > I think we need to leave this to law enforcement. Period. JD -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering http://twitter.com/cmdpromptinc | http://identi.ca/commandprompt _______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
