Archive for May 9th, 2011

In January, I was one of the members of the public selected to serve on a jury in one of the UK’s Crown Courts.

As jurors, the criteria we had to use when deliberating as to whether the accused was innocent or guilty were quite clear. We had to be convinced beyond all reasonable doubt by the evidence to find the defendant guilty. There was no “possibly” or “probably” about it. Unless we were so convinced, then the defendant was innocent.

A high IQ society membership committee is not the Crown Court; however, I am very unamused at the way a friend of mine is being treated, on the basis that someone has set up an anonymous blog purportedly showing “evidence” that he is a cheat. Terminating a member on the basis of anonymous “evidence” before he has had a chance to flush out the perpetrator(s) and disprove the claims is nothing short of guilty until proven innocent.

BM made a fool of himself on TV. I do not think it is just to tar this other individual with the same brush.

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: