• Esjee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I choose not to reply about the allegations because I have no information about the situation other than the paragraph you wrote. That still doesn’t render my point invalid that you think someone needs to prove their innocence in a court, even when the burden of proof lies with the prosecution. If there wasn’t enough evidence to prove him guilty then he’s not guilty. Or do you think that everyone who’s ever stepped foot in a court to plead their innocence is guilty, even if the prosecution had no real evidence against the person? Not really invested in the Heard and Depp trial either, but the man had his whole career ruined over it so I think he’s been dealt more than his fair share of punishment.

    Edit: Also with all these celeb scandals happening you’d think that celebrities would not use their official or traceable accounts to do shady shit, but maybe that’s expecting too much smartness from them.

    • Redditiscancer789@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nope but it’s a case by case basis. The burden of proof is on the prosecution but the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, depending on the accusation laid. If I punch you but you don’t report it till the bruise is gone for what ever reason and you have no witnesses or evidence to prove it, did a crime still occurr?