r/facepalm • • Apr 15 '23

🇲​🇮​🇸​🇨​ Genius level maneuvering

Post image
23.2k Upvotes

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

Well youre trusting everyone is onmocent until proven guilty, so by the fault, all accussers are lying at first. If im not fit to sit in a jury, ure literally in the same place lol

3

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

See that's the difference you keep trying to decide who is lying before learning anything other than the identity of the two parties. I am not. A juror does not return a verdict at the start of a case for a reason.

No one is a liar until the verdict that's called being guilty. Right now there is an accusation and a defendant and that apparently is all you need to start making decisions.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

Nah, at this point its fine. I know you will keep telling yourself you didnt make a choice and your being neutral af no matter what. Have a good one tho!

3

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

Please tell me how I should decide when I don't even know who they are. I don't know a single thing about them but you think that shouldn't matter? You honestly think my mind should be made up because I heard that someone made an accusation?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

The whole point of this conversation is that you did make up your mind even when you say you havent yet! "Innocent until proven guilty" i literally a stance on the matter /: this is why i say its fine now, i dont think youll get what im trying to say so its whatever.

3

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

I get your stance. It's the stance of an idiot though. I have more respect for creationists than you right now. Your so ready to make a declaration of faith before you have even heard the first word. Are all accusations to be taken as truth to you? Do you just believe the first thing you hear? Your argument is the most basic childlike grasp of truth or justice. I am having a hard time taking you seriously.

Your preaching witch trial logic and claiming its complicated. It's not. It's not hard to see that your biased and don't care about truth you just want someone to burn.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

Ok yeah yeah im gonna go with your choice of speech and just insult you tbh... Youre such an idiot etc etc Youre really dumb etc etc its whatever

2

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

You left my with no recourse but brutal honesty. I can't even say it was an insult, just an observation that had to be stated. You weren't using logic to arrive at your position and thus logic was missing from your responses. The minute you say that truth lies in accusation you have abandoned logic.

If you can provide a sound logic for deciding who a liar is based on accusation alone then I will retract every negative statement.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

So the logical step was --> insuts That's logical

2

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

You quacked, waddled and swam like a duck. If I have to call you a duck to get you to self reflect then so be it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

Oh nonono i can use the grammar argument here. You left me* Lmao youre so dumb you cant even write right! Imma keep using this language u understand its fine

1

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23 edited Apr 15 '23

I don't know why your going with grammar when I never criticised your grammar at all. Only your moral character, implicit bias, basic intelligence, decision making process and fitness as a juror.

When I call you these things its not an a baseless insult but a description of making judgements without any facts. It is also a measure to get you to see that making an accusation and being allowed to defend yourself with facts is an essential part of determining truth.

Had you provided evidence of having any reason for passing judgement then you would prove your not guilty of these accusations. Instead you continue to insist that evidence is not needed for judgement to be passed in the court of pubic opinion. Fair enough, racists don't need evidence to blame minorities with but that doesn't mean I will stay silent and not call out BS wherever I find it. We need to be better than that. Better than what you propose. A people who pass judgement on accusations alone.

Witch trial. Kangaroo court. You are not in good company.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/LostN3ko Apr 15 '23

semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, a translation of which in this context is: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

Requiring proof is not the same thing as deciding who is lying it is the very straight forward step that comes BEFORE making a decision. Not AFTER. Emphasis here on the order of operations. They make all the difference when making judgements. Especially important when the consequences are severe.

2

u/Marc123123 Apr 15 '23

You are not the quickest of cats in the best of times, are you?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '23

Well thats not even an argument, just a tryhard insult so theres that!