Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Th'excluded middle #23377
03/19/01 04:06 PM
03/19/01 04:06 PM
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
M
maverick Offline
Carpal Tunnel
maverick  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,757
beyond a reasonable doubt (99% ish?)

... unless the defendant's black with a Texas public defense lawyer...?

(in which circumstances the righteousness of his case becomes at last sheer wrongeousness of his conviction)


Re: Not Guilty isn't Innocent #23378
03/19/01 05:31 PM
03/19/01 05:31 PM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
New England, USA
W
wow Offline
Carpal Tunnel
wow  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
W
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,439
New England, USA
Dear Sparteye, Thank you for that explanation.
It's a concept many reporters and editors never grasp. Makes me grind my teeth in frustration when the terms are used interchangeably. The general public may be forgiven but Editors should know better!
wow


Re: wrongeousness: Nemmine all that #23379
03/19/01 05:52 PM
03/19/01 05:52 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Faldage Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Faldage  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
How's it pronounced? wrong-ghee-us-ness? wron-ghee-us-ness? wron-jee-us-ness? wrong-jee-us-ness? wrong-jus-ness? wron-jus-ness?

The proverbial inquiring minds, etc...

And what does Wronskian mean?


Re: wrongeousness: Nemmine all that #23380
03/19/01 06:52 PM
03/19/01 06:52 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
tsuwm Offline
Carpal Tunnel
tsuwm  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,538
this too shall pass
>how's it pronounced?

well, as it's in all probability a nonce-word (*and a hapax), and since DHL is still dead, I think you can pretty much decide for yourself.


Re:Apposite opposites #23381
03/20/01 02:18 AM
03/20/01 02:18 AM
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 86
Utopia, not in literal sense, ...
S
Scribbler Offline
journeyman
Scribbler  Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 86
Utopia, not in literal sense, ...
Earlier today, the discussion focused briefly on creative writing, negating negatives, and apposite opposites. Tennyson's creative writing instructors (if ever he was so blessed) would probably have taught him of rhetorical figures w/ long, forgettable Greek names (including one or more - I once knew some of these- for "apposite opposites" tsuwm?) Whatever its origin, he created a string of apposite opposites that are forever etched in my mind, to wit: speaking, in Idylls of the King, of Lancelot, "his honor rooted in dishonor stood,"
"And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true." Rather creative, that. ....

Next point, on "th' Excluded Middle",, later in the Post, concur completely w/ Justice Spartye (well, except for the bit about Spartans going somewhere - "Timeo Danaae, dona ferentis" I fear Greeks bearing basketballs) but she certainly knows her law. The "Not Guilty" = "Innocent" misconception wants correcting. For a start, print her post on the front page of the NY Times (The MICHIGAN Law Review has more prestige, but it doesn't have the circulation). Nicely done - again - Sparteye.


Re:Apposite opposites #23382
03/20/01 07:09 AM
03/20/01 07:09 AM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Northamptonshire, England
Capital Kiwi Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Capital Kiwi  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Northamptonshire, England
I dnn't ever remember, even from the labyrinthine American court system, a verdict of "innocent" being handed down. Assuming that I'm right, does this mean that the courts, 10 times out of 10, fail to find that the defendant was completely innocent and shouldn't even have been charged?

Here, as far as I'm aware, we only have "guilty" and "not guilty". Whether or not innocent's a legal term I have no idea. Hang on, I'll ask my legally qualified spouse ... no it's not. Usually in NZ courts, if it becomes clear that the defendant couldn't have committed the crime the judge stops the trial and throws the case out. Since most judges appear to value their jobs, they clearly don't do this very often. Usually the trial proceeds to its bitter end, and either "guilty" or "not guilty" is handed down as a verdict. And "not guilty" can mean either "not proven" as in the Scottish system, or "innocent".

So the legalistic definition of "not guilty" is applied equally to those who really are innocent and those who have a better lawyer than the prosecutor but have committed the crime.

Seems to me, then, that the reporters are reasonably justified in using "not guilty" and "innocent" interchangeably if only because there will always be doubt about the exact, non-legal, meaning of "not guilty" when it's applied to a particular defendant in a particular case.

Well, that's my tuppence worth, anyway.






The idiot also known as Capfka ...
Not guilty vs innocent #23383
03/20/01 08:54 AM
03/20/01 08:54 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393
London
N
NicholasW Offline
enthusiast
NicholasW  Offline
enthusiast
N
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393
London
I have no knowledge of the law, but my lay understanding was that English law has two verdicts, guilty and not guilty. In Scottish law, a form of Roman law, there are three verdicts, guilty, not proven, and innocent. The Romans themselves said either ignoramus 'we do not know' or non liquet 'it is not clear' for the middle term -- I don't know which of those was the correct legal term.

I would have thought that the law of Australia, NZ, 49 US states, and 9 Canadian provinces was English common law: the exceptions being the Roman law of Quebec and Louisiana.

Repeating the disclaimer, this was my purely linguistic and unconfirmed udnerstanding of the difference.


wrongousness #23384
03/20/01 09:01 AM
03/20/01 09:01 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393
London
N
NicholasW Offline
enthusiast
NicholasW  Offline
enthusiast
N
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 393
London
'Wrongeous' is a misspelling by false analogy with 'righteous' and 'timeous', but the word 'wrongous' exists. It sounds to me like an old term of law, as 'timeous' itself is. Chambers's (the only reference I have to hand) gives the pronunciation as -ng- or -ngg-.


Re: wrongousness #23385
03/20/01 09:08 AM
03/20/01 09:08 AM
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Northamptonshire, England
Capital Kiwi Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Capital Kiwi  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,146
Northamptonshire, England
Wrongous is given with two meanings in the COD:

1. Wrongful
2. (Legal) Unjust, illegal

There is also the adverbial form (wrongously).

But no usage examples given.



The idiot also known as Capfka ...
And yet, and yet... #23386
03/20/01 10:05 AM
03/20/01 10:05 AM
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
London, UK
shanks Offline
old hand
shanks  Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
London, UK
Dear Sparteye

Thanks for that explanation. But doesn't it seem to support my case? Legally speaking, once a court has returned a verdict of 'not guilty', the defendant is innocent of the crime. The defendant may not have proven, or demonstrated it - that would be a misrepresentation of the facts - but certainly has the right to claim innocence, as evidenced by the criminal court. Or not?

Given which, I find the civil court system a bit bizarre. I can appreciate that the prepondernace of evidence can be taken into account for a civil case like, say, land rights. But how can damages from a criminal case be decided by a civil court without reference to the verdict of the criminal case. OJ Simpson may, for all I know, have committed murder. However the criminal justice system, for all its flaws, determined him not guilty. How, then, could a civil court find him guilty? Surely a claim for damages should only be allowed in the court if there is a criminal verdict of guilt. Anything else seems to me to be an unfair trial by media cum double jeopardy. But then, I've never understood the American penchant for litigation.

cheer

the sunshine warrior


Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Jackie 

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,883
Posts224,836
Members9,056
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Nikki1221, Veezkneez, LOC, Luna, wordie
9056 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 173 guests, and 3 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
LOC 1
Top Posters(All Time)
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,538
LukeJavan8 9,158
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2018 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.018s Queries: 14 (0.004s) Memory: 3.1796 MB (Peak: 3.3616 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2018-06-22 20:34:06 UTC