At 21:18 17/07/2007 +0100, Jay Ginn wrote:
>Re murders and suspects, is it necessary to point out that 'suspect'
>is not the same as
> >'murderer'? The difference seems to be ignored by Martin Sewell.
> >Perhaps he has evidence thats unavailable to ordinary mortals?
> >Even among suspects who were found guilty at in a murder trial, the
> >list of those posthumously proved to be not guilty is awesomely long
> >(tho even one is too many) in both UK and US. And is obviously worse
> >in fully totalitarian states (see Craig Murray's Murder in Samarkand).
The term 'suspect' is used for legal reasons. Highlighting a
significant bias in statistics is welcome; pedantic sniping is not.
Martin
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|