@spendius,
spendius wrote:If there is no presumption of innocence there is no arguing.
Your assertion is un-justified;
e.g., at trial with a presumption of guilt,
defendant cud be held to prove himself innocent.
spendius wrote:The cops, or the mob, just lock up, or string up,
anybody they fancy and lawyers are not required.
So it's no surprise that lawyers are for the p of i.
I supported that presumption long b4
I was admitted to practice law.
spendius wrote:Whether it is due to considerations of philosophy, a contract,
a constitution, a statute, a body of rules or style or ensuring
that lawyers are a well paid body of estimable men and women
organised into a union led by the USSC with nationwide
sub-branches I am not qualified to say although most people
I know think the latter is the more likely explanation.
The opinions of aliens mean nothing to us.
spendius wrote:I had thought that the logic of the Goldwater position
was that there should be no law.
U thawt rong.
That was not his position.
If u care, then read his book:
The Conscience of a Conservative.
He supports the Original Constitution, as amended per its Article 5.
David