On Thu, 20 May 2010, Shane Mage wrote:
> Show me one instance where a society's folkways include the idea that
> there is no injustice in convicting a defendant on admittedly false
> evidence for a crime that he admittedly had no connection with.
A common form of determing guilt for a crime in Europe during the middle ages was trial by combat. If I accuse you, and I win, then you deserved to die.
I'm not really sure where "false" evidence in our sense fits in there.
And even societies of which your contention is true need have nothing substantive in common in their codes of justice. You're talking about procedural justice. In fact, you're talking about procedures of procedures. In short: exactly the kind of empty universality that allows two groups or societies to differ on every central and defining point.
Which was the point I was making.
Michael