Text 33313, 82 rader
Skriven 2009-06-11 20:39:47 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Dale Shipp (1:261/1466.0)
Ärende: Saberi vs Blom
======================
Hello Dale,

On Wednesday June 10 2009 23:13, you wrote to me:

 DS>> How do you even know that there was any evidence?

 MVDV>> Because that it what they do in court: present evidence.

 DS> Assumption

No, deduction. read on...

 DS>  -- it was a closed court.  Nothing other than the verdict was
 DS> published.  No outside witnesses were present.  No reporting on what
 DS> transpired.  And yet, you assume that someone presented evidence, and
 DS> you presume that it was sufficient.

How can a court reach a verdict when no evidence is submitted? They reached a
verdict. That very fact tells me that evidence was submitted.

And of course it was sufficient. How else can they reach a verdict of guilty?
Keep in mind that all that matters whether it was sufficient in THEIR view.

The evidence may be absolutely worthless in your eyes, or mine for that matter,
but our opinion on the quality of the evidence is irrelevant. Just as it my
opinion on the Blom case was irrelevant.

 MVDV>> I have not expressed a personal opinion on their guilt. What I say
 MVDV>> is that according to THEIR laws and THEIR court they were found
 MVDV>> guilty.

 DS> You presented it as a fact that was true.

Isn't it a fact that the Korean court found them guilty?

 DS> And yet, you find the evidence in the North Korean case sufficient
 DS> enough to present the judgement as being legitimate?

I have offered no opinion on the quality of the evidence. All I claimed was
that THEY must have considered it sufficient.

 DS>   Double standard on your part.

No, I am just holding up the mirror for you.

 DS> I am merely pointing out your lack of consistency.

You are the one who is inconsistent. In th Blom case  kept telling me that what
we call entrapment is legal in the US and that that is all that matters. Yet
you refuse to accept that when someone gets in trouble in North Korea, all that
matters is what is how THE KOREANS see it.

 MVDV>> Now that the shoe is on the other foot and US citizens are
 MVDV>> tried under North Korean law for breaking NK law, you start
 MVDV>> to protest.

 DS> I protested your double standard in describing the two cases.  I have
 DS> not and would not publicly give any opinion about the justice of
 DS> the decision in either case.

You already have. In both cases.

 MVDV>> About the Blom case you wondered why I defended a child
 MVDV>> molester. Now I ask you why you defend spies and illegal
 MVDV>> border crossers.

 DS> Your label, not mine. And the fact that you present it as true is yet
 DS> another way in which you are agreeing with the North Koreans.

Eh?? where did I write that I agree with the North Koreans? All I claim is that
you have no leg to stand on when they treat, what they consider law breakers,
according to their rules and customs only. As that is ecactly what the US did
in the Blom case and you supported that.

 DS> They are not known for their honesty and integrity.

In your eyes. I would not be all that surprised if they say the same about you.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)