Avatar feed
Responses: 2
LTC John Shaw
1
1
0
We can define it but very few can agree on what evidence supports which assertion.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana
0
0
0
Evidence is unnecessary, apparently, if the hearsay is imaginable in the eyes of the Court. Was Officer D AWOL as reported by Officer A? Without any evidence of Officer D ever being AWOL, Officer is presumed to be telling the truth twisting the rule of law and placing the burden to prove innocence on Officer D proving that Prosecution need not prove guilt as charged before finding the Defendant guilty. The "innocent until proven guilty by the preponderance of the evidence" in the Constitution seems to have changed without Congress changing this law and the President ratifying it. I understand this is a negative experience, but it is a real case that still bothers the Defendant in that case.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close