>You will say -- every nonlawyer does (I forget whether you are a
>lawyer) -- you can't _show_ what's in
>people's minds. Of course you can. That's what lawyers do all the
>time. It's our job. You assemble evidence
>and make a case. Or you don't make a case, and then the defendant is
>acquitted or found not liable.
And that's a seriously marvelous thing. I love reading history of law. What you describe here is one of our crowning achievements I think. Trouble is there's no time do this for everybody anymore, so let the plea bargains begin. And the defense side has been seriously fucked with for some time now.
>all drug laws that I am aware of require intention or knowledge. (In
>fact what laws call mens rea,
>culpable mental state, is required for almost all crimes; strict
>liability crimes are few and far
>between).
Unless you live in public housing: "We hold that Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue," writes Chief Justice William Rehnquist in an 11-page decision. Federal law "requires lease terms that give local public housing authorities the discretion to terminate the lease of a tenant when a member of the household or a guest engages in drug-related activity, regardless of whether the tenant knew, or should have known, of the drug-related activity."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0327/p02s01-usju.html