logoalt Hacker News

jrflowerstoday at 5:22 AM1 replyview on HN

Exactly. Seeing as there is no presumption of innocence in the US and the burden of proof is the defendant’s, it makes sense that a judge can put anyone in jail indefinitely without proving anything. If he had died in prison it would have been due process because contempt is meant to be so punitive that it acts as a deterrent to any other person that sets foot in a court room from refusing to be compelled into making self-incriminatory statements.

Now obviously this entire line of reasoning would be completely nullified if there were examples to the contrary or if any of the things mentioned had been adjudicated before but


Replies

mauvehaustoday at 12:52 PM

> Seeing as there is no presumption of innocence in the US

Wait, what? Have you served on a criminal jury in the US? There most definitely is a presumption of innocence, and the judge will remind the jury of this multiple times in the course of the trial.

The burden is on the prosecution (I.e. the state) to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Source: jury duty.

show 1 reply