Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
the 99% conviction rate is a very common statistic provided by the supreme people’s court of China
“This is so common, it’s everywhere, everyone knows it, it’s so easy to find, but I’m going to link to fucking Wikipedia instead so I can use it to launder a number from some bullshit NGO”
“Are U.S. federal courts a sham?”
How bad does your conviction rate need to be for you to accept that a judicial system has fair trials? Do you want police and prosecutors pursuing a bunch of cases they can’t adequately prove?
“This is so common, it’s everywhere, everyone knows it, it’s so easy to find, but I’m going to link to fucking Wikipedia instead so I can use it to launder a number from some bullshit NGO”
How bad does your conviction rate need to be for you to accept that a judicial system has fair trials? Do you want police and prosecutors pursuing a bunch of cases they can’t adequately prove?
fair trials are not simply about the conviction rate, they are about the rights of the citizens holding up under the oppression of the court.
Then why are you citing (alleging, really, without a citation) conviction rates in China as evidence that their judicial system isn’t fair?
because the conviction rate in China is pretty good. evidence that their judicial system isn’t fair.
Why do you keep making comments when you know almost nothing about the topic and clearly haven’t thought any of this through?
people keep asking me questions about a topic I’m familiar with, so I keep answering them.
You mean you keep evading them, sometimes by pretending to lack objective permanence.
The classic tactic of evasion through clear answers, a public record, facts and sources.
Which you have not done.
no, that’s not what I mean.
Yes it is. as has been demonstrated though clear facts and sources.