"Rock of Gibraltar" Justice: "... Unless the Contrary is Proved"

Looks like the Bolehland LAZY, mindless and bungling justice system has found a solution for their inefficiency and lack of grey-matter. 

What is the solution?

Yes... you guessed it, friend- You can now be "PRESUMED GUILTY" until you can prove your innocence!!

(and why does it stink of a "great mamak" to me?)

I'd call this the Augustine Paul's "Rock of Gibraltar" solution.
It all comes back to me now .....

Now we know why not so long ago,
the mattress went up & down the court house, 

people got sodomized in a non-existent condo and 

"Justice" Augustine Paul can pronounce people guilty becos ....

the accused had "failed to prove his innocence" in "Sodomy-I".
That is, he was presumed guilty- "unless the contrary was proved".

So NOW, whatever crappy "evidence" the police uses against you 

is deemed the indisputable "proof of guilt"- until you prove them wrong. 

The police need to do nothing more. 

The Attorney General's Chambers need to do nothing. 

NOW YOU DO THE INVESTIGATION 

TO ESCAPE PUNISHMENT, YOU "PROLE"!!

So much for our "First-class Democracy" which the PM spits out eh?
I just "love" UMNO's justice system!!

**********************************************

Guilty! 

Go directly to JAIL. 

Do not pass Go. 

Do not collect $200

There is a piece of very scary news on the front page of The Sun today. It is titled "Presumed guilty" and is about the recent amendment (No.2) to the Evidence Act.

Doesn't mean anything to you? Not worth bothering about? You could be in for a rude shock. If you have a blog, use Facebook or just have a broadband WiFi account you could land in big trouble.
If "someone posts content said to be offensive on your Facebook wall, or if someone piggybacks your WiFi account and uploads a controversial document, you will be immediately deemed the publisher of the content and subject to prosecution under the relevant laws such as the Sedition Act."
For more, go to "Niamah!!!"

********************************

This is what The Sun Says:-

"Not only that, if a person starts a blog in your name and publishes content that is red-flagged, you will be considered the publisher unless you can prove otherwise.

All of this is provided for through the insertion of Section 114A into the Act which was recently bulldozed through both houses of Parliament in its last meeting with no debate.

Section 114A, which explains presumption of fact in publication, states:

– a person whose name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting himself as the owner, host, administrator, editor or sub-editor, or who in any manner facilitates to publish or re-publish the publication is presumed to have published or re-published the contents of the publication 

unless the contrary is proved.

– a person who is registered with a network service provider as a subscriber of a network service on which any publication originates from is presumed to be the person who published or re-published the publication 

unless the contrary is proved.

– Any person who has in his custody or control any computer on which any publication originates from is presumed to have published or re-published the content of the publication 

unless the contrary is proved. 

(Computer here means any data processing device, including tablets, laptops and mobile phones.)

Kuala Lumpur Bar Information Technology Committee co-chairman Foong Cheng Leong told theSun these amendments would put fear in people.

“We shouldn’t even be discussing this law because it is based on the idea that one is presumed being guilty until proven innocent.

“Why does the owner of a site, or Facebook account, have to take the rap and prove his innocence while being subject to investigation and seizure of property?” he asked.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz, while winding up the Bill in Parliament on April 18, had said the use of pseudonyms and anonymity by any party to commit cyber crimes made it difficult for action to be taken against them.

Hence, he said the Evidence Act 1950 had to be amended to address the issue of internet anonymity."