Do you *disagree* with every decision that every US court has ever made?  No?  Then what is the relevance of retreating from on-point specifics into fuzzy generalities?

As an aside, you *do* of course realize that US courts commonly reach contradictory decisions which are resolved by higher courts, and sometimes precedents are overturned.  So it is not possible to agree with all of them.

I tried to help you and tvbcof improve by pointing out your factual errors (IE, commission vs equity and presumption of innocence).

What factual errors of mine have you and tvbcof pointed out?

[crickets.png]

[tumbleweeds.gif]