George Hopkins removed from DCI Hall of Fame

[jjeffeory]

24 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

I can't speak for Spinning, but Terri nails it, I think: plenty of guilty people get acquitted (and, even more sadly, plenty of innocent people get convicted: sometimes celebrities even buy full-age ads in newspapers calling for them to be executed, and they go to jail for years, and then someone else is found to have committed the crime).

Yes, I thought more about it,band also did some research on the topic.

There's also civil versus criminal acquittal.

So, yea, I should thank Spinning for getting me to think about it.

[Terri Schehr]

6 hours ago, jjeffeory said:

Okay, what if he is found not guilty.

I just think that we need to go all the way through the process before removing him from all these places.

I mean, I believe the people coming forward, but I don't know any of the facts, and we haven't gone through the legal process.

...and I'll be extremely upset if anyone thinks that I don't believe the people coming forward.

....and btw, the Cambridge dictionary says acquit is:

acquitverb [ T ]

 US  /əˈkwɪt/ -tt-

acquit verb [ T ] (DECIDE NOT GUILTY)

to decide officially in a court of law that someone is not guilty of a particular crime:

She was acquitted.

The jury acquitted him.

 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/acquit

 

“At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.”

Edited August 29, 2019 by Terri Schehr

[JimF-LowBari]

33 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said:

 

“At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.”

Yep and for example my mom was on a DUI jury. Cops botched getting the evidence because the guy had a DUI history. Just kept saying they “knew” he was drunk so no blood test, etc. Judges final instructions to jury were “you are deciding guilt or innocence on this one case only”. Jury found him innocent but feeling was “he might have been DUI but can’t be proven because the cops screwed up so badly”. Followed by “guess I won’t be driving in Hershey for a while cause the cops are gonna be POed”.

need the old Scottish innocent, guilt and “not proven”

Edited August 29, 2019 by JimF-LowBari

[cixelsyd]

Since we are doing definitions, here is the first one we should look at:

fame

  (fām)

n.

a. The state of being widely known, widely recognized, or of great popular interest: a singer of international fame.

b. Public estimation; reputation: a politician of ill fame.

 

"Fame" is not necessarily all good.  Any given "hall of fame" can become a hall of shame if there are no other standards or criteria for induction.

[HockeyDad]

Fame is a bee. 

It has a song -

it has a sting -

Ah, too, it has a wing. 

[JimF-LowBari]

38 minutes ago, cixelsyd said:

Since we are doing definitions, here is the first one we should look at:

fame

  (fām)

n.

a. The state of being widely known, widely recognized, or of great popular interest: a singer of international fame.

b. Public estimation; reputation: a politician of ill fame.

 

"Fame" is not necessarily all good.  Any given "hall of fame" can become a hall of shame if there are no other standards or criteria for induction.

Irony alert - talking about fame/infamy on Micheal Jackson’s birthday... thank you SiriusXM Rock and Roll Hall of Fame station for starting my day with that tidbit 😫

[horndevil]

11 hours ago, Spinning said:

I honestly don’t understand why an acquittal even matters for the HOF.  It shouldn’t, because the individual would have no legal recourse against the board.  It’s a privilege, not a right to be nominated and it should come with that stipulation that it could be taken away.

I'm curious if he actually would have legal recourse. If an acquittal were to take place and GH were to deem that his removal from the HOF had caused him serious professional damages, would he not be entitled to compensation from those damages?

[garfield]

3 minutes ago, horndevil said:

I'm curious if he actually would have legal recourse. If an acquittal were to take place and GH were to deem that his removal from the HOF had caused him serious professional damages, would he not be entitled to compensation from those damages?

He'd have to prove damages.  If he's acquitted, I would think the Cadets would then be more at risk than the HOF.

 

[JimF-LowBari]

3 minutes ago, garfield said:

He'd have to prove damages.  If he's acquitted, I would think the Cadets would then be more at risk than the HOF.

 

And think he would have more damage from actions taken by other groups (YEA) than HOF. GH didn’t lose a paycheck from HOF and never saw a newspaper article about removal from HOF

[xandandl]

14 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

I can't speak for Spinning, but Terri nails it, I think: plenty of guilty people get acquitted (and, even more sadly, plenty of innocent people get convicted: sometimes celebrities even buy full-age ads in newspapers calling for them to be executed, and they go to jail for years, and then someone else is found to have committed the crime).

Then there is the Innocence Project of Yeshiva U/U.of Chicago/Northwestern U and a number of reputable law schools who have found over 350 wrongfully convicted persons in the US currently behind bars. DNA is one method of proving innocence that judges, lawyers, and juries miss. You might check out their website.