View Single Post
Old 31-01-2009, 14:29   #155
Derek
Inactive
 
Derek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Glasgow
Services: SkyHD and Broadband
Posts: 9,158
Derek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny stars
Derek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny starsDerek has a pair of shiny stars
Re: "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf View Post
having no evidence other than the word of even the most trusted officer is still having no evidence.
So on your 'logic' then unless someone is caught on camera doing something they can't be convicted.

That would certainly effect the conviction rates. Pretty much all traffic laws would be unenforceable unless the Police were in a car fitted with a camera. People could wander about the streets with weapons and unless caught on CCTV the Police couldn't be trusted to tell the truth that they caught them with a knife etc.

Perhaps you'd like to come up with an idea that isn't so ludicrous. Eyewitness evidence is what 99% of court cases come down to. If two professional witnesses are being discounted in favour of someone proven to be of bad character then its a sad day for 'justice' in my book.
Derek is offline