There is no presumption of innocence in public affairs.

If Dems are to have any chance of defeating Collins.

I don't see what that has to do with anything though. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a concept that applies to courtroom trials. It doesn't apply to anything else. It doesn't mean you can't be suspicious of someone running for office and not want them representing your party because they either don't seem to live up to a basic standard of decency or they have so much baggage that they make a terrible candidate, even if they are eventually somehow vindicated later on down the road.

You thought you were making point. You in fact, were not.

The lady had gone to Walgreens to get a flu shot and some other immunizations. The pharmacist injected her at an odd angle, which she claimed caused serious nerve damage in her arm. She was asking for $3 million in damages. Her attorneys were outmatched. Walgreens hired a big Dallas firm. In the end, she got $90k solely because he did not give her a form that outlined the potential side effects of the shot before administering it. If memory serves, that is an FDA requirement. The trial was interesting and my first and only experience on a jury. Several of the jurors were cool and fun to talk with on breaks. But it's not an experience I'm anxious to repeat. The worst part of it was the jury selection, which lasted hours, and I didn't care to answer a bunch of personal questions from attorneys from both sides in front of a room full of people. And listening to the other jurors answer questions was super tedious.


My wife was in a child abuse case 15 years ago that resulted in a child being removed from the custody of her parents, which was a much heavier experience.

I've telecommuted for 18 years and pretty much am in charge of my own schedule as long as I'm getting my work done.

And if I have a panic attack, I need to walk to burn off the adrenaline, could take 30 minutes to an hour and then I'm exhausted once the cortisol dies down. I don't have them for any good reason either. I can be totally relaxed and have one.

But all that put together and I'd have a really rough time being on a jury.

I don't like getting up early either, and by that time had been working from home for 4 years, so the idea of hitting the road at rush hour was not appealing. It's sort of like being in elementary school again. There's not much freedom of movement outside of break times and lunch, which at 90 minutes I found unnecessarily long. All of that would definitely not be ideal for someone who has panic issues. In fact, I could see where all of the restrictions might induce one in those prone to them. If you ever got called, I think you would almost surely be excused.

The case was for wrongful death and it broke my heart
The woman had undiagnosed breast cancer. Went to her primary doc first, who told her the lump was nothing but out of precaution sent for a mammogram. The primary doc sent the order for the wrong breast so it came back negative ( no mass found). Ended up being a very aggressive form of cancer, it took 6 months before the mistake was figured out. Primary settled for very little but radiology did not settle.
Her family lost it was 11 to 1. The jury felt it was her fault for not correcting the docs order with the radiologist. English was not her first language, she had moved to the states from the Philippines. The case was based on standard of care and whether she received it from radiologist technician. I didn't believe she did. Unfortunately I failed to convince my fellow jurors. I have had many mammograms and the radiologist has always examined my breast to locate a lump before the mammogram. This didn't happen for this woman.

What are you talking about?

please refrain from running for United States Senate. Thank you.

If somebody comes to recruit you to run for Senate, just say No, if you have that many skeletons in your closet.

There are many past "indiscretions" he has admitted.
Eventually the I was young excuse gets thin. Especially for things that happened only a couple years ago.

Its existence is a matter of fact.

when people show you who they are, BELIEVE THEM

follow that edict outside of the jurors chosen to hear a case. Non jurors most definitely can believe someone is guilty of what they are accused of before charges are brought or a trial.

And a verdict of not guilty does not mean a person is innocent. It simply means the State did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Taken away when sent to prison. No one (yet) is sending Platner to prison.

It applies only in criminal trials, a subset of jury trials.

A preponderance of evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.

about informal aspects of what we observe.

At Christmas 1995.

If this had been an isolated accusation and there wasn’t other accusations of abuse against women or the Nazi’s tattoo he may have survived this. I think this was just too much with probably more to come. We really need this Senate seat.