The Instigator
tjordan
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
lddebater540
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

In the pursuit of justice, due process ought to be valued above the discovery of fact.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/1/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,136 times Debate No: 19528
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (0)

 

tjordan

Con

In this debate, I will argue that: In the pursuit of justice, due process ought NOT to be valued above the discovery of fact.

Format:
R1-con: format
R1-pro:acceptance/make arguments.
R2-con: arguments.
R2-pro: arguments.
R3-con: arguments.
R3-pro: closing arguments
R4-con: closing arguments
R4-pro: MAKE NO ARGUMENTS.

I look forward to my opponents opening arguments.
lddebater540

Pro

This is my first debate in a few months. I accept this round and negate the resolution. Before the round begins, however, I would like to make two brief observations. First, this debate seems to be about the inherent "goodness" of due process rights. Consequently, the American constitutionality of due process rights is immaterial to the round because a right may be Constitutional but not good or just. For example, ownership of others through slavery was a constitutional right, but it was clearly unjust. So, my opponent cannot use the Constitution as a justification. Second, extreme examples of due process violations, such as torture or severe mental interrogation, cannot be used as an argument in the round because they involve the violation of human rights and would automatically prevent me from being able to debate for justice. The round must be fair to both debaters, so such extreme examples cannot be used because they are unjust for another reason.
Debate Round No. 1
tjordan

Con

tjordan forfeited this round.
lddebater540

Pro

lddebater540 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
tjordan

Con

tjordan forfeited this round.
lddebater540

Pro

lddebater540 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
tjordan

Con

tjordan forfeited this round.
lddebater540

Pro

lddebater540 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
Pro also ignored the format I laid out as he acts like the opening arguments are to be made in round 2
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
"I accept this round and negate the resolution"???????? It seems pretty clear that you are pro iddebater540. Not Con. So you should be affirming the resolution not negating it.
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
Due Process: "An established course for judicial proceedings or other governmental activities designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual."
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
That didn't answer Roy's question. Saying that person A should go free despite confessing to a murder because his name was misspelled is beyond an extreme position regarding Due Process. I think you really need to define due process and draw specific boundaries for yourself to argue against. If Pro has to defend that then you are creating a resolution that there is noway you can lose.
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
Valued above means simply that. In our justice system, when the two conflict, which one should be used, or valued higher? Which one gets the last word. In the example you gave, pro would say A goes free because due process has been violated and due process should be valued higher (is the most important thing). Con would say no, A should not go free because he is guilty of the crime, therefore if we are to be "just" he must be punished according to the law.
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
The resolution is not well-defined, so I think the debate will hinge on what "valued above" means in the context. Suppose A shoots B in front a bus load of nuns and a security camera. A confesses. However, A's name was misspelled on the indictment, an error in due process. So should A go free, or is that a correctable error?

In an actual case, a defendant accepted a plea bargain, confessed to murder, and was convicted. Later, it was discovered that the defendant was in jail in another county. There was no error in process, so technically no grounds for appeal.

"Valued above" needs more definition.
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
Alrighty haha. I may post again later anyway. I've already won this debate on here once as pro.
Posted by jm_notguilty 5 years ago
jm_notguilty
naw no need unless ur willing to wait 3 weeks lol
Posted by tjordan 5 years ago
tjordan
If you want, I will delete and challenge you later when you can accept?
Posted by jm_notguilty 5 years ago
jm_notguilty
would love to take this... sadly am stuck in 5 debates
No votes have been placed for this debate.