That is some of the thoughts we have when we see people that we deemed as guilty get away from the court's judgement. It is indeed true that there are a lot of injustice at times but regardless of that, the idea that people are "innocent until proven guilty" should stand, and I mean every single time. It is okay for us to have an opinion, to talk about some of these loopholes or suspicion we have but it is not right to say someone who has yet to be found guilty as guilty.
While a lot of people dislike US President Donald Trump (I'm not one of those), there are a few key things that makes sense even though there is an outcry from those who question Trump's decisions and policies (valid points on a lot of the policies that seemed like a political play and I agreed on some of it as well).
Is Saudi guilty of Khashoggi's disappearance?
For example, the disappearance of Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi in Saudi Arabia. His disappearance and presumed death has caused an international outcry and strained relations between Saudi Arabia and the West. Turkish pro-government newspaper Yeni Safak has published what it said were details from the audio, including that his torturers severed Khashoggi’s fingers during an interrogation and later beheaded and dismembered him. That's horrible isn't it? Yes, it is. It is very horrible but the Saudi has denied the Turkish allegations that Khashoggi was murdered and his body was removed from the consulate after he entered on Oct 2.
So, who do you believe? Well, the international outcry is good in a way as it keeps such a crisis and scandal in check but does it mean that the Saudi is guilty by default? First of all, while there is a friendly economic relationship between Saudi and Turkey, the political relationship has become rather intense.
The 2017 Qatar diplomatic crisis is one of those obvious examples. Turkey supported Qatar against Saudi Arabia in the ongoing diplomatic dispute. Turkey and a resurgent Iran is viewed as trying to advance a distinct agenda: rebuilding military and economic beachheads along the eastern flank of the Arabian peninsula from Oman to Southern Iraq. Saudi in response has threatened to impose sanctions against Turkey and discussed on topic to curb "Turkish expansionist policy. Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Saudi of being non-Islamic. They also deployed troops to defend the government of Qatar from an attempted coup by Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
My point here is that there is an obvious conflict of interest when the Turkish government announced that they have proof that Khashoggi was murdered by the Saudi.
And here is what Trump said in interview: "Here we go again with you're guilty until proven innocent," Trump said in the interview, comparing the allegations against Saudi Arabia to the sexual misconduct allegations from multiple women against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing.
And while I have a feeling that the allegations are true, mine is only perception formed from reading the news, social media and other comments. Is there really indeed evidence to support the claims? We'll have to wait but for now, I think innocent until proven should stand.
Kavanaugh a sex predator?
And the case against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Three women stepped up and and accuse Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.
Christine Blasey Ford said that Kavanaugh tried to rape her when they were both in their high school. That is more than 35 years ago. And she told the world she was 100% certain that Kavanaugh attacked her. Then there is Deborah Ramirez. She alleged that Kavanaugh once exposed himself during a drinking game when they were students at Yale. And the third accuser, Julie Swetnick claimed to have witnessed Kavanaugh orchestrating mass gang-rapes when he was 15 years old.
But then all of these are cases that happened so long ago. Are there solid evidence that Kavanaugh did it? I don't think so. Take Ford's case. She's a registered Democrat, according to a report by Washington Post. Then there is another statement that I find it to be extremely doubtful: Ford said she considered herself a reluctant witness who came forward out of civic duty. My question is simple. Kavanaugh has been a judge for a long time. If it's out of civic duty, shouldn't she be coming out much earlier?
But that aside, are there strong evidences that Kavanaugh was guilty? 35 years ago. Both have drink alcohol. What's your take? I only can say this. Even if you think he is guilty, the same should be applied: innocent until proven guilty.
I know it's disheartening and it's true that sexual allegations are difficult to prove. But this doesn't mean someone is guilty by default in the event of allegations.
CR7 accused of rape.
And is Kavanaugh alone? No, there is also the latest Cristiano Ronaldo's case. He was accused of rape. And there is a photo of him partying with the woman who accused her of the act. Am I defending a rapist and a sex predator?
I think I'm only making a simple point: everyone should be innocent until proven guilty. Yes, you can have your views that he or she is guilty but the law shouldn't be biased just because the headlines say so. Is there an impact on people like Cristiano Ronaldo? Of course there is. Just read at what some of the sponsors are saying.
Of course, I believe it's likely that both will eventually rush for a settlement. CR7 to put the bad news behind to avoid the impact to the brand and the woman, Kathryn Mayorga would likely to accept a settlement on the basis that the law suit will drag on too long and affect her. (Look, these part of it are simply assumptions that I made)
No comments:
Post a Comment