Starvin Larry

Via Kit Lange The Patrick Henry Society

We patriots are often found debating the finer points of Constitutional amendments and/or concepts embodied in Liberty.  One of the greatest of these—and one of those with some of the most widely used derivatives—is the idea that someone is innocent until proven guilty.  We understand this in an abstract sense.  It’s a cliche; you don’t have to be a Constitutional scholar to have heard the phrase.  It’s only been part of the opening credits for the show Cops for two decades.  But what does it really mean?  And why are patriots some of the first people to trash it in application?  Simple:  Because we are human…and maybe, because there’s an application for the concept that most people don’t even think about.

Innocent until proven guilty.  It’s the foundation of our entire court system, our entire justice system.  When someone is charged or even accused of a crime, the burden of proof lies with the entity making the accusation.  It does not lie with the accused.   This ties in with another phrase most people are familiar with: beyond a reasonable doubt.  In other words, people cannot be convicted of a crime unless the jury (or judge in some cases) is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the guilt was proven.  An accused person cannot be convicted because a jury thinks, “Gee, it sounds plausible,” or because one of the witnesses is their buddy who they’ve known for 20 years and trust implicitly.  In fact, one of the basic ways to get excused form a jury is to know or be related to any of the parties in the case.  Quite frankly, the system is meant to be stacked in favor of the accused, and this theoretically protects innocent people from being convicted frivolously or targeted by a government looking to silence them for some reason.  We know, of course, that in practice the concept is in shambles, but that’s another issue.

Yes, yes, I know all this, you say.  Why am I giving a primer on law when I’m not a lawyer? Here’s why: because the idea that someone accused of something is innocent until proven guilty gets thrown out the window far too often when dealing with interpersonal relationships in our prepper groups and III% units.  How many times have we seen a group implode due to accusations, drama, and mudslinging fests that rival a political campaign?  All over social media, all over the blogs…some of these groups seem to thrive on the drama.  He said and she said and oh did you hear what so-and-so posted?  One person makes accusations, and then the accused party runs to their own blog or Facebook page to answer those accusations and—if they’re into the flinging poo thing—level a few of their own.  Right about this time, someone starts making popcorn because a third party (usually a friend of one side or the other) decides to weigh in.  More blogs, more division, more BS.  After a while, not only is everything still unresolved, but the surrounding populace is sick to death of hearing about it.  In some cases there is permanent damage to the charity, cause or endeavor that the entire group had set out to contribute to, not to mention irreparable harm to reputations and credibility.

Read the rest @ The Patrick Henry Society