Re: What is the "Presumption of Innocence"

"neepy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Immortalist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > "neepy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Christene Herr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >  news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > > The idea of innocent until proven guilty is one of the things that
sets
> > > > America apart.
> > >
> > > Really?  Maybe you could provide a list of countries that don't adopt
> > > this assumption in criminal trials?
> > >
> >
> > In the West aren't there two main legal schools of thought, one holding
true
> > to Roman law and the other influenced by the "English Common Law"
tradition
> > or what we call case law? In countries that opt for the prior have a
nasty
> > reputation as concerns suspects? Whereas in the later we evolve the
truth we
> > can find from an accumulation of similar cases. This later case instead
of
> > iron principle inflexible and rigid.
>
> Well, that isn't an answer to the question ("Which countries don't
> adopt the presumption of innocence in criminal trials?").
>
> But, I would ask you a similar question:  Name the "nasty" (Western)
> countries that depend on Roman Law.
>
> Also, "case law" doesn't get you to "The Truth", it just says "In
> similar cases we decided this in the past, so lets do the same again"
> (so it is pretty inflexible, too).  Most Western countries (I'm no
> expert... maybe all) depend on a mixture of "case" and "statute" law.

Is common law the same as case law? If not there would
be 3 kinds of law.