In every criminal trial the onus is always on the Crown to prove guilt. The standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. If a person accused of committing a crime is found “not guilty” (whether by a Judge alone or a jury) it means (and only means) the Crown has not proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is NOT a declaration of innocence. The two are very different things and the difference is important. For example, in the Forcillo case the finding of not guilty with respect to the first 3 gun shots should not be interpreted that the jury found the shooting to be justified. No such finding was open to the jury. The verdict means that the Crown did not prove Forcillo was guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Period.
- So this guy got charged. “Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office reviewed video of the June 14 incident, and on Friday approved two felony hate crime charges against Timothy Trybus, 62. For first offenders, a felony hate crime in Illinois can result in a prison term of one to three years and a fine of up to $25,000.” Is that overkill or if “Hate crimes have increased at an alarming rate over the past year,” is it necessary? “There should be consequences. People have to learn there are consequences, especially in the era of Trump,” Gutierrez told the Chicago Tribune. “I really do believe there are people who say to themselves, ‘If Trump can do it, I can do it. Why can’t I go out there and say the things the president says?’”
- BIG COSTS FOR THE BIG SHOTS –> GoFundMe
- R. v. Duncan = CREATIVE JUDICIAL WRITING – Entertaining prose. I enjoyed the appended notes to the text. “You should get out of town”, the man said. And so began the journey that resulted in my path intersecting with Matthew Duncan’s path. And thence to these reasons, with a slight detour through territory that might have confused Lewis Carroll.”
- The new Canadian Judicial Council Judicial Education website. http://judicialeducation.cjc-ccm.ca/
- WHAT DO THEY TEACH AT “JUDGES SCHOOL”? – Find out here.