Not Proved

Posted on March 28, 2003 in Thinking War

I’m using the phrase “not proved” to refer to allegations of human rights violations that have not been corroborated by outside groups.

The term comes from Scottish law, where juries can choose one of three options in a criminal trial: guilty, not guilty, or not proved.

“Not proved” means that the prosecution hasn’t established sufficient proof of the guilt of the defendant, but the jury isn’t convinced of innocence, either. The defendant may be tried again once.

I don’t put it past Iraq to do many of the things that are being claimed in the media. On the other hand, the fog of war and the propaganda needs of both sides make it difficult to determine, accurately, what is going on now.

Many war crimes remain “not proved”. For this reason, until I see verification from those who don’t have a stake in hiding their wrongs or frank admissions from the parties, I shall not repeat the stories of atrocities that I hear as certainties. I ask others to do the same. They remain “not proved”, mere allegations, cases to be argued before the International Criminal Court if more evidence arrives.

In the meantime, let’s get rid of the Hague Invasion Clause. Or else Holland will be our troops’ next destination. NATO will not hold together for that. They will stand against us.