Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> Rykk wrote:

>> But the State is only empowered to punish provable guilt in the US.
>
> Which is why they need to be empowered to find that proof where it
> exists. In the best case, crime would even be prevented.

The state is empowered to find proof of crime.  The US has the most 
effective forensics team in the world.  We even invented the process for 
reconstructing plane crashes etc,. to discover thier cause.

>
>> Also, our constitution guarantees presumed innocence until guilt is
>> proven.
>
> If we were allowed to know the truth, innocent people wouldn't need
> to be accused.

How do you propose that "WE" be allowed to know the truth?  I'll also remind 
you that a witness in the US is not required to purjur themselves.

>
>> Without presumed innocence a country can degrade to the point where
>> being accused of committing a crime is as bad as being convicted.
>
> And without being empowered to know the truth, we can be swayed by
> persuasive or sincere, yet incorrect arguments to punish innocent
> people, or to let the guilty free, or perhaps the truth will never be
> known.

What truth?  We have the right to privacy.  That is truth.  No system will 
stop all the guilty from going free nor prevent all the innocent from being 
victims.  You paint a pretty picture.  But you do not seem to think it 
through.  Unless you have some Special power to tell if someone is guilty or 
not, everything you have said is moot.

Rykk