Originally posted by Midnight Watchman
Not to argue your ultimate point, but a small correction to your statement - this is not true of "any" court of law. Systems based on the Napoleonic Code (like France, Switzerland, many South American countries), and any Civil proceeding in the U.S. a person is presumed guilty and must prove their innocence.
US law is not based upon the Napoleonic Code, it’s based on English common law, as interpreted by Locke.
Even in civil cases, the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. The only difference is that in criminal cases, guilt must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, while in civil cases, by a “preponderance” of the evidence.
In both cases, the charged is presumed completely innocent until it can be proven otherwise. The wisdom of this self-apparent: otherwise, any nutcase with a grudge could bring suit against somebody, making every citizen a victim.
This is even more pronounced from your example of Freemasonry. The very ridiculousness and abstractness of the charges levied against us are impossible to either prove or disprove. Any idiot can invent a quack conspiracy, and use it to demonize their opponent; for a case to be real, an actual grievance must have taken place, with evidence available to prove it.
Fiat Lvx.


), namely a corrupt lodge breaking away from the main order, and abusing it's
position and name.
