No one politician should be allowed to judge the guilt, to charge an individual, to judge the guilt of an individual and to execute an individual.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
When a person is found not guilty, they're found not guilty.
Lawyers should not be charged with the same crimes as their clients. Trials related to political charges are not in accordance with human rights.
The right of the judge to inflict punishment gives him both power and opportunity to oppress the innocent; yet none but crazy men will from thence determine that it is best to have neither a legislature nor judges.
Decisions on a matter as serious as charging an individual with a crime cannot be decided on anything less than complete examination of all available evidence. Anything less is not justice.
Let me be clear - no one is above the law. Not a politician, not a priest, not a criminal, not a police officer. We are all accountable for our actions.
No man can be judged a criminal until he is found guilty; nor can society take from him the public protection until it has been proved that he has violated the conditions on which it was granted. What right, then, but that of power, can authorize the punishment of a citizen so long as there remains any doubt of his guilt?
I come from the liberal side of thinking: Better one guilty man should walk free than one innocent man found guilty.
Rather leave the crime of the guilty unpunished than condemn the innocent.
It must be a judge - never a politician - who decides whether someone is to be locked up.
In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.
No opposing quotes found.