Well, that's probably a good thing, overall. Pure logic would have no one in jail at any point until convicted. Pure logic would have slander and libel laws ruled unconstitutional. Etc., etc.
Well, that's probably a good thing, overall. Pure logic would have no one in jail at any point until convicted. Pure logic would have slander and libel laws ruled unconstitutional. Etc., etc.
No it wouldn't, because there's still a legitimate state interest in not letting them arbitrarily flee the jurisdiction. It's perfectly logical to want defendants to show up for trial even if they're presumed innocent. Otherwise the legal system can't function. It can certainly function without locking people up the way they do in authoritarian countries, simply because the regime accuses them of crimes against the state.
Well, that's probably a good thing, overall. Pure logic would have no one in jail at any point until convicted. Pure logic would have slander and libel laws ruled unconstitutional. Etc., etc.
No it wouldn't, because there's still a legitimate state interest in not letting them arbitrarily flee the jurisdiction. It's perfectly logical to want defendants to show up for trial even if they're presumed innocent. Otherwise the legal system can't function. It can certainly function without locking people up the way they do in authoritarian countries, simply because the regime accuses them of crimes against the state.