On 27/02/2008, Sheldon Rampton sheldon@prwatch.org wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
All of those things, as stated earlier, reflect poorly. Convicting someone of a crime should be on the basis of an accusation by a named, identifiable accuser who can be confronted by the accused (subject to observation in the courtroom, of course, and intimidation and the like should be strictly disallowed), not something else. One should never be convicted or imprisoned on a basis like this: "Well who said I did something wrong?" "Well we can't tell you that, but here's a scrambled videotape of their accusation." "Well that's not true, I want to cross-examine them! And I want to know who they are, what if it's someone who has a grudge against me?" "Sorry, won't be possible."
Please be careful when quoting. I didn't say that. That was in my email as a quote from the email I was replying to from Todd Allen. My reply actually said pretty much the same thing as yours...