- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Presumption of Innocence, Use of 'Alleged', in Today's Hyper-Recorded World
Posted on 4/11/25 at 12:43 am
Posted on 4/11/25 at 12:43 am
A recent thread, and many news stories in the past have me wondering if our society should reconsider the constant use of the word 'alleged' in reporting and discussing specific crimes.
A lot of what gets on the feeds or is posted here is accompanied by video evidence of the exact crime happening.
Now, I understand the fact that someone did something doesn't always equal automatic guilt... like in self defense or whatever other circumstances.
But when you're looking at a video of a person setting someone on fire, or someone spraying bullets into a crowd, or a stabbing caught on CCTV, anything really... why are we still using the word 'alleged'?
I feel that word was very useful in the time before everything being recorded for video and sound... but is outdated now. Unless, of course, the identity of the 'doer' isn't clear in the video... but what do y'all think of 'alleged' being used in cases of absolute certainty that a particular someone did a particular deed?
Again... this is separate from presumed innocence. Just talking about fact based reporting and discussion when said facts are readily available and easily identifiable to one and all.
Thoughts?
A lot of what gets on the feeds or is posted here is accompanied by video evidence of the exact crime happening.
Now, I understand the fact that someone did something doesn't always equal automatic guilt... like in self defense or whatever other circumstances.
But when you're looking at a video of a person setting someone on fire, or someone spraying bullets into a crowd, or a stabbing caught on CCTV, anything really... why are we still using the word 'alleged'?
I feel that word was very useful in the time before everything being recorded for video and sound... but is outdated now. Unless, of course, the identity of the 'doer' isn't clear in the video... but what do y'all think of 'alleged' being used in cases of absolute certainty that a particular someone did a particular deed?
Again... this is separate from presumed innocence. Just talking about fact based reporting and discussion when said facts are readily available and easily identifiable to one and all.
Thoughts?
6
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:01 am to SallysHuman
quote:Allegedly.
...but is outdated now.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:05 am to SallysHuman
People are innocent until proven guilty.
Government is guilty until proven innocent.
Government is guilty until proven innocent.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:14 am to TrueTiger
quote:
TrueTiger
What about the use of the word allegedly... when there is plain video/audio recording of it?
You can shank a guy and be presumed innocent of a crime, be found not guilty... but still have shanked the dude.
I feel that allegedly is outdated in some situations... it was a concept from a time when many crimes, or actions, were corroborated by victim and or witness statements, which leaves room for doubt or error... but cold, hard, recordings remove the 'allegedly' in my mind.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:35 am to SallysHuman
quote:What if someone created an AI video of you performing illegal activities and spread it around the internet leading to your arrest?
I feel that allegedly is outdated in some situations... it was a concept from a time when many crimes, or actions, were corroborated by victim and or witness statements, which leaves room for doubt or error... but cold, hard, recordings remove the 'allegedly' in my mind.
You could almost say that recordings were most helpful up until the last year or two. Now even recordings should be examined to ensure they are an actual “eye-witness” to the truth.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:45 am to FooManChoo
quote:
What if someone created an AI video of you performing illegal activities and spread it around the internet leading to your arrest? You could almost say that recordings were most helpful up until the last year or two. Now even recordings should be examined to ensure they are an actual “eye-witness” to the truth.
Fair point, I suppose... is it not able to distinguish between created clips vs recorded material? If so, I guess that could change in the future.
On the other hand, government cameras are going up errywhere, street cams, traffic cams and the like- those would be pretty secure, right?
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:57 am to SallysHuman
quote:
Again... this is separate from presumed innocence.
If you’re innocent until PROVEN guilty, then it can’t be separate until “alleged” becomes “convicted”
Posted on 4/11/25 at 6:59 am to SallysHuman
every other word they use on our local news is "controversial" on the bright side our local news looks like they're recruited from the union rescue mission and ward roped from the salvation army and their average salary is 36k.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 7:06 am to SallysHuman
quote:
why are we still using the word 'alleged'?
Because the accused are innocent until proven guilty (as in convicted in court). They are only alleged to have committed the action, crime, etc. until their guilt is proven.
If someone publicly describes someone as having committed some crime without an adjudication of guilt, or the qualifier “alleged”, they open themselves up to civil claims of libel or slander. You might not be a big enough target on a random message board, but journalists and their employers would certainly be a big target with their large audiences and deep pockets.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 7:13 am to Jack Bauers HnK
quote:
Because the accused are innocent until proven guilty (as in convicted in court). They are only alleged to have committed the action, crime, etc. until their guilt is proven.
I guess, in my mind, I separate action from whether or not it is criminal.
I believe in presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Say someone is getting mugged, it's on CCTV... the mugee then shoots or shanks the mugger, still in view of CCTV.
The mugee did, in fact, act... whether that action is criminal is what is decided in court.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 7:35 am to SallysHuman
quote:
Say someone is getting mugged, it's on CCTV... the mugee then shoots or shanks the mugger, still in view of CCTV.
Then you might accurately say, “it appears such and such occurred” without claiming factually that it did occur. You didn’t actually see it occur. You were not an eye witness. You saw a representation on a screen of something occurring. Journalists aren’t going to rely on the accuracy of video, an arrest affidavit, a law enforcement press conference, etc. and communicate an accusation of guilt to their huge audience on their own without the qualifier.
Again, the concern one takes for their own potential liability for libel or slander affects how much thought and effort goes into these considerations and language.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 8:54 am to SallysHuman
agree totally - there are numerous abuses of our great language these days - all in response to outlandish social misfits feelings being so brittle and the lawyer class being so eager to lodge lawsuits.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 8:58 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
agree totally - there are numerous abuses of our great language these days - all in response to outlandish social misfits feelings being so brittle and the lawyer class being so eager to lodge lawsuits.
I feel.... heard. And understood, lol.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 1:51 pm to FooManChoo
Hey Foo,
What do you think about the book of Jude that you claim is God breathed?
Jude 1:14-15
Obviously Jude was talking about prophetic literature of Enoch. If Jude is God breathed then what that author considered prophetic scripture has to also be God breathed. Jude was quoting this line, for reference:
1 Enoch 1:9
I’ve shown to you countless times now how the biblical cosmology is one of a flat earth with a dome shaped firmament on top of it holding back an ocean of water above the firmament. I don’t think it gets any more explicit than this:
1 Enoch 6:13
I know you will hate this and your dogma will cloud your ability to think critically and rationally, but if you were not a hypocrite, you would acknowledge that 1 Enoch is just as God-breathed as Jude and the other scriptures and that Enoch witnessed the place at the end of the (flat) earth where the dome of the firmament intersected and rested upon the earth.
What do you think about the book of Jude that you claim is God breathed?
Jude 1:14-15
quote:
14It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
Obviously Jude was talking about prophetic literature of Enoch. If Jude is God breathed then what that author considered prophetic scripture has to also be God breathed. Jude was quoting this line, for reference:
1 Enoch 1:9
quote:
And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgement upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.
I’ve shown to you countless times now how the biblical cosmology is one of a flat earth with a dome shaped firmament on top of it holding back an ocean of water above the firmament. I don’t think it gets any more explicit than this:
1 Enoch 6:13
quote:
13 I saw at the end of the earth the firmament of the heaven above and I proceeded and saw a place which burns day and night, where there are seven mountains of magnificent stones.
I know you will hate this and your dogma will cloud your ability to think critically and rationally, but if you were not a hypocrite, you would acknowledge that 1 Enoch is just as God-breathed as Jude and the other scriptures and that Enoch witnessed the place at the end of the (flat) earth where the dome of the firmament intersected and rested upon the earth.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 1:53 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Squirrelmeister
You are lost, friend... are you not able to start threads?
Posted on 4/11/25 at 2:02 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
are you not able to start threads?
Sometimes, but often the topic gets the thread anchored or deleted.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 2:03 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
Sometimes, but often the topic gets the thread anchored or deleted.
I can't imagine why.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 2:09 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
I can't imagine why
My OT thread about Magic Johnson “allegedly” getting HIV from getting pumped in the butt by dudes didn’t get deleted. Different admin I guess.
We need a Religion thread if religious topics - heavily intertwined with politics - isn’t welcome in the Political forum.
This post was edited on 4/11/25 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 4/11/25 at 2:12 pm to Squirrelmeister
quote:
We need a Religion thread if religious topics - heavily intertwined with politics - isn’t welcome in the Political forum.
Religion is great to discuss, agreed.
But Squirrel, if I may give you a tip... your posts are both v e r y long and quite often inflammatory... pick one or the other, both just doesn't invite good, beneficial conversation and discussion.
Posted on 4/11/25 at 2:25 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
But Squirrel, if I may give you a tip... your posts are both v e r y long and quite often inflammatory... pick one or the other, both just doesn't invite good, beneficial conversation and discussion.
I hope you are able to give those same tips to many other posters on here who don’t abide by the loving turn the other cheek Jesus but instead act like the irrational jealous evil god of Exodus, Deuteronomy and Kings. When those others, such as Foo, don’t abide by the golden rule of Jesus, they should expect like in kind treatment.
Just saying.
And the reason my posts are generally long is I feel the need to provide much factual and scientific evidence to support my assertions. I don’t response well to the baseless assertions and circular logic of Foo and his ilk, and I choose to treat others the way I’d want to be treated (I would expect them to provide supporting evidence rather than the typical baseless assertions and circular logic.
If reading my posts bothers you, feel free to skip over them.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News