(May 9, 2013 at 1:32 am)catfish Wrote:(May 9, 2013 at 1:03 am)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: You want British courts? French courts? Fine with me. What I will not accept is a Stalinist court which was the mold of much of the IMT. I did not think you would either. I simply guessed you were American or British and thus the standards of justice are about the same.
What is new about my description of the necessary content of an allocution? Pardon but I was not aware of any other kind of content required in any real court in any non-communist country.
I have no idea what you mean by not thinking it through.
If everyone who confessed to a crime were convicted upon mere admission the more heinous the crime the more people would be convicted. That is just the way it is. That is why there must be an allocution that is complete and acceptable to both the prosecution and the court.
Why would you want it otherwise?
Did you really think there was a single confession to Darkstar's number? I'd love to read that one.
Seriously man, what definition of "allocution" are you using? Are you using an adult dictionary?
I'm not arguing any numbers or even any type of evidence, I'm merely coaxing you to pinpoint an "acceptable" source (for you of course).
You agreed to US court standards and according to US court standards, a confession counts.
Like I said, you didn't think this through.
(I really want to know what you think "allocution" means)
The point is a mere confession is insufficient in any court since the witch trials in the west and Stalin in the east. The person confessing has to provide sufficient detail to demonstrate he is not some attention seeking crank but rather the real perp. A confession does NOT count all by itself. Never has.
To the point if you wish I have read several things which people have claimed to be confessions but which do not rise the level acceptable in court. Post one and I will show you. Post it COMPLETELY not edited to just the credible parts.
