Manga Poll
Manga is the Japanese equivalent of comics
with a unique style and following. Join the revolution! Read some manga today!
Join #baka-updates @irc.irchighway.net
RSS Feed
News
News Article
New Poll - Guilty vs. Innocent
This week's poll was suggested by saraneon. Philosophical question
You can submit poll ideas here
http://www.mangaupdates.com/showtopic.php?tid=3903
Previous Poll Results:
Question: These are the protagonists of the 10 bestselling manga of all time. Who is your favorite?
Choices:
Conan Edogawa (Detective Conan) - votes: 461 (15%)
Duke Togo (Golgo 13) - votes: 97 (3.2%)
Hanamichi Sakuragi (Slam Dunk) - votes: 195 (6.3%)
Kankichi Ryotsu (KochiKame) - votes: 25 (0.8%)
Monkey D. Luffy (One Piece) - votes: 842 (27.4%)
Naruto Uzumaki (Naruto) - votes: 392 (12.7%)
Nobita Nobi (Doraemon) - votes: 75 (2.4%)
Shin-chan (Crayon Shin-chan) - votes: 139 (4.5%)
Son Goku (Dragon Ball) - votes: 434 (14.1%)
Tanjiro Kamado (Demon Slayer) - votes: 417 (13.6%)
There were 3076 total votes.
The poll ended: January 28th, 2023 11:09pm PST
I haven't actually read One Piece...
You can submit poll ideas here
http://www.mangaupdates.com/showtopic.php?tid=3903
Previous Poll Results:
Question: These are the protagonists of the 10 bestselling manga of all time. Who is your favorite?
Choices:
Conan Edogawa (Detective Conan) - votes: 461 (15%)
Duke Togo (Golgo 13) - votes: 97 (3.2%)
Hanamichi Sakuragi (Slam Dunk) - votes: 195 (6.3%)
Kankichi Ryotsu (KochiKame) - votes: 25 (0.8%)
Monkey D. Luffy (One Piece) - votes: 842 (27.4%)
Naruto Uzumaki (Naruto) - votes: 392 (12.7%)
Nobita Nobi (Doraemon) - votes: 75 (2.4%)
Shin-chan (Crayon Shin-chan) - votes: 139 (4.5%)
Son Goku (Dragon Ball) - votes: 434 (14.1%)
Tanjiro Kamado (Demon Slayer) - votes: 417 (13.6%)
There were 3076 total votes.
The poll ended: January 28th, 2023 11:09pm PST
I haven't actually read One Piece...
Comments (limited to first 100 replies)
» kuchra on January 29th, 2023, 4:52am
"A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time."
» Trimutius on January 29th, 2023, 5:09am
Of course anyone is innocent until proven guilty, and even when somewhat proven there are always stories like Shawshank...
"guilty until proven innocent" is so wrong and that is how you get witch hunts...
"guilty until proven innocent" is so wrong and that is how you get witch hunts...
» alidan on February 3rd, 2023, 3:41am
one of the states by new york had a state prosecutor said in cases where a person is accused of touching a kid, most of their convictions have no evidence.
essentially the accusation is the evidence.
essentially the accusation is the evidence.
» hkanz on January 29th, 2023, 8:48am
I agree with our legal system operating on the premise of 'innocent until proven guilty', but lack of a conviction doesn't mean that someone is innocent. It's really just a choice of whether we would prefer to let many guilty people walk free (innocent until proven guilty) or convict many innocent people (guilty until proven innocent).
» neofryboy on January 29th, 2023, 10:07am
This poll is just an analysis of how many people will give troll answers, and why I always try to give a third option for them specifically.
» Helipilot on January 29th, 2023, 10:27pm
But I thought "believe all women" and accused are guilty by default?
» Trimutius on January 30th, 2023, 5:24am
Quote from Helipilot
But I thought "believe all women" and accused are guilty by default?
So many women lied about rape and whatnot, just to get their ex or someone they had falling out with out of spite...
» flowinmyboat on February 4th, 2023, 12:09pm
Quote from Trimutius
So many women lied about rape and whatnot, just to get their ex or someone they had falling out with out of spite...
Uh. Do you have any real evidence for this? Everything I have read says this isn't true. However, the irony of you saying this is that that shows you voted for "Guilty until proven innocent."
In regards to the question, the only right answer is "Innocent until proven guilty." However, you have to consider that someone who is a suspect -- assuming a good justice system, which we can't, but I assume the question is philosophical -- would only hold a suspect when they have good reason to believe they should be investigated. Cooler heads should prevail, in my opinion. Wildly pointing fingers and speculation is not actual justice. Evidence and actual thorough investigation is the only way to go -- often times, evidence is hard to come by, as K9ofChaos pointed out with the Al Capone example. Everyone knew what he was doing, but they didn't have anything to nail him with until they brought in a forensic accountant.
Dunno. Are there actual lawyers and/or people well-versed in criminal justice around to give an informed perspective?
» Jessica_desu29 on January 31st, 2023, 12:04am
It is nearly impossible to prove something didn't happen, so it just makes sense that in order to take someone's liberty away via conviction and incarceration, the accuser/government must show proof a crime occurred at the hands of the defendant. It's not on the accused to defend themselves. I'd rather have guilty people acquitted than truly innocent people rotting away in prison or being executed.
» alidan on February 3rd, 2023, 3:48am
on the topic of execution, I am all for the death penalty, in fact, make it a faster process, however I believe that the bar for this should not be beyond reasonable doubt but any doubt, and convictions can only happen through red handed evidence. lets say someone killed someone in a gas station that has a piece of crap camera, even if they smiled into the camera while doing it, the quality is so low that you can't convict on that image alone it can't be a death penalty trial. we have the wide spread cameras, we have the technology to make sure no one questions anything, so why not apply it?
if any human needs to be put on stand to convict, you can't go for death, our perception is horrible, the movie 'my cousin vinny' while a comedy and exaggerated, does point out flaws in people arguments and perception. the human element of trials cant be there for death to be an option.
if any human needs to be put on stand to convict, you can't go for death, our perception is horrible, the movie 'my cousin vinny' while a comedy and exaggerated, does point out flaws in people arguments and perception. the human element of trials cant be there for death to be an option.
» mallika23 on January 31st, 2023, 12:28am
I cannot vote this one.. It's too hard.
While ethically we would answer "innocent until proven guilty", I've seen cases--sexual abuse, corruption, murder, etc--left hanging just because they're "not proven guilty".
Those who have power and money usually are able to escape the prison because the court did not prove their crime. 😅
Are they "innocent"? No. But does it "proven" by the court? Also no..
While ethically we would answer "innocent until proven guilty", I've seen cases--sexual abuse, corruption, murder, etc--left hanging just because they're "not proven guilty".
Those who have power and money usually are able to escape the prison because the court did not prove their crime. 😅
Are they "innocent"? No. But does it "proven" by the court? Also no..
» Sugarshark on January 31st, 2023, 2:33am
not many guilty if the cops don't do their jobs...
when was the last time you knew someone who actually did their job
when was the last time you knew someone who actually did their job
» naeddyr on January 31st, 2023, 9:09am
In a court of law, yes, as long as we can trust that that court is impartial. But personally, I'm going not going to bother if it's likely enough. Another terrible poll designed to court controversy.
» YuriM on January 31st, 2023, 3:01pm
We got first choice in criminal code, and second choice in administrative code.
» Senrosj on February 2nd, 2023, 2:47pm
"Innocent until proven guilty".
Otherwise, anyone could say any kind of preposterous thing to get you in trouble, and you would have to bend over backward to prove that you are innocent.
And when you have countries where you are basically forced to plead guilty, because you would otherwise be detained for a long time in precarious conditions with cops treating you like garbage, even if you didn't do anything wrong... Japan has a "99%" conviction rate...
But yes, neither option is perfect. "Innocent until..." means you let many guilty people go, because you can't prove their crimes. "Guilty until..." means you could end up in jail, because your ex got angry at you, hit herself many times and said you committed domestic abuse, after both of you had an intense verbal fight.
Otherwise, anyone could say any kind of preposterous thing to get you in trouble, and you would have to bend over backward to prove that you are innocent.
And when you have countries where you are basically forced to plead guilty, because you would otherwise be detained for a long time in precarious conditions with cops treating you like garbage, even if you didn't do anything wrong... Japan has a "99%" conviction rate...
But yes, neither option is perfect. "Innocent until..." means you let many guilty people go, because you can't prove their crimes. "Guilty until..." means you could end up in jail, because your ex got angry at you, hit herself many times and said you committed domestic abuse, after both of you had an intense verbal fight.
» LazyReviewer on February 3rd, 2023, 12:42pm
Regardless of how flawed an implementation of a system is, "innocent until proven guilty" is the system that has the least baked-in issues. As someone said, it's often impossible to prove something didn't happen because nothing usually doesn't leave evidence.
Here in Canada, Ontario my best friend was assumed guilty by the police for supposedly flashing someone. Then the police connected that to another case where my friend wasn't in the vicinity of at the time. How do you prove you weren't at a location a few weeks ago?
The assumption of guilt is far more flawed than the assumption of innocence. You let a criminal go free, he's likely to get caught doing it again. You jail an innocent person, and the perpetrator never gets caught because no one looks for them.
Here in Canada, Ontario my best friend was assumed guilty by the police for supposedly flashing someone. Then the police connected that to another case where my friend wasn't in the vicinity of at the time. How do you prove you weren't at a location a few weeks ago?
The assumption of guilt is far more flawed than the assumption of innocence. You let a criminal go free, he's likely to get caught doing it again. You jail an innocent person, and the perpetrator never gets caught because no one looks for them.
» K9ofChaos on February 3rd, 2023, 7:36pm
I agree with Senrosj and LazyReviewer here. If you accuse someone of a particularly serious crime, the onus is on the accuser to back it up with evidence. Assuming that the accused is always guilty is a recipe for potentially innocent people getting locked up for a crime they didn't commit. Besides, if someone whose obviously guilty got off the first time, they can be tried again for a different crime if they're repeat offenders. After all the stuff Al Capone did, what really did him in was his tax evasion charge from the IRS.
