[rollei_list] Re: Bob Shell Is On Trial

  • From: "Richard Knoppow" <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:58:52 -0700


----- Original Message ----- From: "J Saldanha" <tyco@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2007 11:59 AM
Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Bob Shell Is On Trial


Your error, Mr Small, was to broadcast Mr. Shell's predicament. All these comments in the rollei list must bring small comfort to Mr. Shell in his present circumstances. You can see what Mr. Shell is now exposed to; shallow analysis, full of inuendo and nastiness like the one from the correspondent who sports all his achievements after his name. You should have left the matter between Mr. Shell and yourself.

I certainly agree with your characterization of some of the posting here, but, IMO it was _not_ an _error_ on Mr. Small's part. He was simply aquatinting the list members with the fact that a long-delayed trial of a friend was finally progressing. He posted a source of information for those interested in following the case. Please note that Marc Small is an attorney and that he represented Mr.Shell at the beginning of this trouble and that Mr. Shell is both a long time participant in this mailing list and also a well known figure in the world of photography. He has many acquaintances here, people who have some interest in his future, that is, a legitimate interest in this trial. Also, in the United States of America trials are required to be _public_. This is one of many checks to insure justice and prevent "star-chamber" trials. In informing the list about the trial Mr.Small was not telling us anything that was not already public. It is also very important to recognize the principle in Anglo-American law that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. In a criminal proceeding the evidence must meet quite high standards before it is presented to a jury and can be challenged on many basis by the defence. The defendant does NOT have to present a defense but the defense attorney can nonetheless challenge the stuffing out of whatever the prosecution presents: that is a large part of the job of the defense. IMO, the presumption of innocence may be the most important right a citizen has. In any type of case, criminal or civil, the members of the jury are forbidden to speculate about the meaning of the evidence or the nature of the guilt until all the evidence has been presented to them and they are required to determine the truth. That way they are not operating on untested or partial evidence, or on information that may not qualify as evidence. It also insures that both sides, and the judge, have had their say. I think we should adopt the standard required of the jury here: no speculation about what happened, we know very little on which to base this. I think we should also adopt the standard that a person is considered innocent of a charge until _proven_ guilty. All the discussion of the charges here have been implacatory of guilt: in my never humble opinion this is wrong. Please let us refrain from discussion, and, especially, speculation until the case is decided. Again, Bob Shell is a friend to us even though most of us have not met him in person. He deserves at least our consideration if not also our support. I think I would rather have to deal with a serious disease than be involved with the law: it must be extremely difficult for Bob and his family. Please, as his friends, let us not contribute to this difficulty.

---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
Rollei List

- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org

- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list

Other related posts: