And when it uses the flyium z and it ' s flying through the air and just standing with that look on its face <| sep |> Yea , because energy has no sink at all . Think before comment please . <| sep |> Trump is the first president to support gay marriage at his inauguration . this is stupid <| sep |> Yeah , but it fits nicely with the whole polluter pays principle and promotes sustainability by pushing people toward use of active or public forms of transit instead of individual car use . <| sep |> Jerry Man , you really SUCK at this . <| sep |> I don ' t see how you can say , well the evidence was weak and he should be have been acquitted . but I still think he did it . wut ? How is it that so many people confuse adjudication of criminal guilt with adjudication of the truth of events ? Criminal conviction requires a very high certainty of guilt . It is important for consistent administration of justice that acquittals occur when that standard is not met . A court finding someone not guilty of a crime means the crime was not proved beyond a reasonable doubt . It doesn ' t , at all , mean that the person has been proved not guilty of the crime . It doesn ' t even suggest the person was not guilty of the crime , actually plenty of not guilty findings occur when the person is pretty obviously guilty of the crime of which they are accused . Other than personal bias and unsubstantiated allegations , what reason do you have to believe he did it ? What world do you live in in which you imagine most cases of intimate partner actual sexual assault result in actual unequivocal physical evidence ? Obviously I have no basis other than allegations by victims , as is true in the vast majority of cases of these sorts of crimes . In this case , maybe you don ' t know anyone involved with this case or who is socially connected to Ghomeshi , but I live in Toronto and I do . That context the numerous expressions I saw from people about how this was not at all surprising , etc informs part of how I assess the probabilities here . The other part is what ' s the counterfactual ? That these women just actively decided to lie and collude to destroy the guy ' s life ? It is absurd to suggest that ' s more likely than that the events occurred as they described them , and yet they lied in parts of their testimony in order to enhance the probability of an actual conviction .