I have a button that says “I <3 Bacon”. People are always amazed at such public displays of pork-love. If only we can all have clothes made OF the fried delight then we can all “eat our shorts”.

“Sheriffs, police chiefs lobbying against proposed law”

From Reason Hit & Run:

Fired Up
March 27, 2009

Mike and Cathy Grosse were shopping when they got the call from the Hamilton, Ohio, fire department. Firefighters had mistaken their home for a vacant house and knocked down the door during a training exercise. The firefighters caused some $1,000 in damage, but they say they’ll pay to fix things.

REAL EMERGENCY WORKERS pay for their mistakes.

Seriously? Was he able to keep a straight face while saying that?

And how did the neighbor kids react when you turned on the barbeque and picked up the fork?

;)

Of course, preserving all the video evidence in every case might lead to a few more cops behind bars. I’m not sure how Hannity might feel about that.

“We try to make sure everything is as painless as possible,” Woodward said. “Sometimes innocent people are at the same place as suspected criminals.”

Not if they’re already in custody, you dumb shit.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/dna_evidence_frees_black_man?utm_source=a-section

LOL! Look at the text on the screen… “Tracks led to a cave where Marshal (The black man) may have spent winters”

And of course, they won’t rest until they “…find the black man who did this!”

However, that simply means ‘direct evidence’ as you put it, almost never exists. A guy confessing ON THE STAND is direct evidence of nothing other than he is willing to confess on the stand.

Just because the Judicial System considers that ‘direct evidence’ doesn’t mean it’s right.

If I take the stand, and for whatever reason… testify that I shot Kennedy from the Grassy Knoll… what is that ‘direct evidence’ of? It’s CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence that I’m lying. But the only thing that it directly proves is I’m willing to confess to that on the stand.

Further, how many confessions are ‘on the stand’?

My point is the mechanics of confession should be to produce investigation that then produces evidence. That evidence would technically be circumstantial… but it would be PHYSICAL evidence, like a bloody knife with finger prints on it.

I apologize if my use of terms may be in error.

the problem is some evidence is presented as fact, when it is not. A jury is assigned to decide the weight of the evidence even if it is not actually fact.

So if you have a really high IQ, you cannot buy jarts?

I fully support a Debtor’s Prison providing we start with the biggest debtors first. Why is Congress looking at their shoes? What? $10 Trillion?!?!?!

@Bob (#14): I don’t think you understand circumstantial evidence. A confession on the witness stand would be direct evidence. An eye-witness’s testimony that he saw the defendant stab the victim would be direct evidence. A bloody knife with the defendant’s fingerprints on it, found next to (or even in) the body of a murder victim is circumstantial evidence of the defendant’s identity as the killer, no matter how damning it may be. Most reliable evidence is circumstantial evidence (which is one reason courts now look at circumstantial evidence on the same footing as direct evidence). Direct evidence, especially in criminal cases, is rare.