Interesting. The article is largely consistent with our conversation, although there was no mention of a correlation to beyond a reasonable doubt. It almost seemed as though there was a binary process, which was a mindset that I had trouble understanding. Indeed, it was as if there was just some mythical, undefined point at which the judge would arbitrarily be convinced of guilt - all or nothing. While I understand that reaching beyond a reasonable doubt is still highly subjective (as you convincingly previously elaborated on), the Iraqi system makes more sense knowing that there is a standard and known tipping point of guilt, which makes it not so different after all.
P.S. The student statement was not meant to take away from the validity of my analysis (given the knowledge I possess), but rather to raise a flag that not all requisite data (significant gaps in knowledge) may be available. Indeed, I probably know just enough to sound convincing, but I also run a reasonable risk of being convincingly wrong. It seemed appropriate to say so. I do see your point, though, and the observation is noted.
Bookmarks