Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mahranch 4108 days ago
They were probably downvoted because they say bluntly that they wish KP would have been found guilty, but then go on to say that it isn't clear if they violated CPA and they probably didn't discriminate. Their bias is clearly outlined in their comment, and they certainly aren't being objective/logical. Why find someone guilty if they aren't, by your own words, "probably not guilty"?

This case was about justice, not advancing causes.

1 comments

> They were probably downvoted because they say bluntly that they wish KP would have been found guilty, but then go on to say that it isn't clear if they violated CPA and they probably didn't discriminate.

If they were downvoted for that reason (rather than the more likely, but also inappropriate, reasons also offered in other comments of either the post author's identity or people not reacting to the Michael Brown reference) then people seriously need to read.

He didn't say he still wishes KP was found guilty, he said he wanted that coming into it, but even with that initial desire couldn't see a basis for finding anything worse than negligence. E.g., he said even coming into the case biased against KP, he couldn't view the evidence as strongly supporting wrongdoing.