Reply to Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

Forum Index » Infants, Toddlers, & Preschoolers

Reply to "Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

Legal definitions often differ from dictionary definitions, you're clearly not a lawyer. And no one said that being a mile away from home constituted neglect. They said it constituted evidence of neglect. I think you don't understand what evidence means.[/quote]

Correct, I am not a lawyer.

So is the lawyerly argument is that being a mile away from home isn't neglect but is evidence of neglect? In my limited experience of lawyers, when lawyers say that [word] might seem to mean [definition], but actually means [something completely different that nobody who was not a lawyer would ever think it means], that's a sign that the lawyers are on shaky ground.[/quote]

Well in this case, it means that the definition is laid out in the regulations. That's how that works usually. You should probably stop opining on stuff you don't understand.[/quote]

Yes, the definition of neglect is in the regulations.

But you haven't explained how something that is not neglect can nonetheless be evidence of neglect.[/quote]

Oh! You actually don't understand what evidences. Okay, here's an example: say someone saw someone running out of a convenience store two minutes after the store was robbed. That does not prove that the guy running out was the robber in and of itself. However, it is evidence that he's the robber.  Make sense?  You need evidence beyond reasonable doubt to convict.  Not just "some evidence".  [/quote]

It doesn't make sense in this case. What neglect would being a mile away from home without a parent be evidence of, in this case?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics