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...

A just ruler amongst tyrants

"A plea of innocence is guilty of wasting my time."

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...

I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist. © Trimutius

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).

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.

But I thought "believe all women" and accused are guilty by default?

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...

I am envoy from nowhere in nowhere. Nobody and nothing have sent me. And though it is impossible I exist. © Trimutius

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.

떡대수 supremacy

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..

not many guilty if the cops don't do their jobs...
when was the last time you knew someone who actually did their job

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.

We got first choice in criminal code, and second choice in administrative code.

"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.

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.

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.