アンバー・タンブリンさんのインスタグラム写真 - (アンバー・タンブリンInstagram)「So much to say about the burden of proof’s origin story. Read about it in my book, out in paperback this January! Pre-order link in my bio.👆🏻👆🏻 “A male playwright texted me to ask about the future of “innocent until proven guilty,” a concept that this #MeToo movement seemed to be destroying with “reckless abandon.” I have often contemplated the phrase “innocent until proven guilty” and the presumption of innocence as a first rule when applied outside of a courtroom. To make a presumption is to make a choice to side with one party over another, without consideration. This begs the question: What’s the point of weighing anything when the scale is already imbalanced? While I understand and respect the importance of this principle within the judicial system, I question its misappropriation outside of the law. It strikes me as an exploitation exacted by problematic men who hide behind it willy-nilly as though it can be applied anywhere, at anytime, under the auspices of their entitlement. Outside of a courtroom—and sometimes even in it—“innocent until proven guilty” can’t help but be flawed, much like many of the laws created by our forefathers, whose intentions have naturally eroded over time (such as the right to bear arms in a world of printable 3-D guns.) “Presumed innocent until proven guilty” was first coined by the English lawyer Sir William Garrow in the 1700s. His aim was to force accusers to thoroughly present evidence in a court of law to back up their claims. Sir Garrow was a defense lawyer during the wild era of swift trials in England—trials that often lasted ten minutes and seemed more like reality shows for blood-hungry audiences than what we know of prosecutions today. Countersuits didn’t even exist until the late 1800s and SLAPP laws (or Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), which are intended to intimidate and silence a case’s critics, were not introduced until 1980. Garrow was not thinking about a judicial world in which plaintiffs are burdened with frivolous discovery requests, tying lawyers up with meaningless hours of paperwork, purposefully racking up legal fees and wasting their time...” (quote cont’d in comments below):」11月14日 2時28分