Innocent Until Proven Guilty - Question

Robar1717
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:44 pm

Innocent Until Proven Guilty - Question

by: Robar1717 on
Mon Oct 20, 2014 11:02 pm

Without the story...

I'm supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty (in this case I am but "he said she said" normally works again the defendant). To me if I do nothing and get found guilty then I'm presumed guilty until proven innocent?!?!?!

So is this process actually legal? The way this is setup is kind of like if I get charged with murder that in 15 days if I don't request a trial that I'm guilty because I've don't nothing. Why is the onus on the defendant to file for the court date to please not-guilty? Is there any legal documentation that actually supports being guilty until proven innocent? I'm not sure if anyone has thought of this before or anything but figured it sounds like there's a flaw in that system.

If I was charged with murder I would be arrested and charged. I would be required to attend a plea hearing that the crown initiates (or have a representative attend for me) and then I would have my trial unless I want to plead guilty. The right to be presumed innocent doesn't sound like its limited to criminal law by any means and in civil court the burden of proof and initiative is on the prosecution.

Yes some of you will instantly think, as I did that, if someone doesn't pay in 15 days that the crown has to do all the filing and paperwork and such and if people didn't have to request that no one would really want to pay right away. To me I also thought that if there was an issue with the radar/lidar testing (for speeding) or officer notes or other evidence that the crown just wouldn't file knowing that they're missing proper evidence and also that if the officer doesn't file the tickets/infractions in time that the crown would never know. Basically you're just being put into a bad spot from the start with the way it works.

So do any laws or case laws support this onus on defendant to prove themselves innocent by requesting a trial process that don't go against a higher level law? Just want to know what you think because I kind of feel like I'm being put on the spot to prove my innocent or accept guilt.






Post Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “Courts and Procedure”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests