> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:26 PM, Badri Natarajan <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> No, I didnt. That our courts are a lot more tolerant towards those who >>> indulge in perjury is the disturbing part. >> >> Do you have any evidence at all to support this? Or if not, if you can > > ad hominem? have you ever interacted with the indian legal system > before asking this question. i have and choose not to provide evidence > un-related to the discussion (Kasab's case) at hand. >
How is my question ad hominem? You made an unsupported assertion and I asked if you had any evidence to support it, because it doesn't jibe with my experience. Not because I think Indian courts are better than American courts - on average American courts are certainly better. But because perjury by its nature is a very serious charge, with a very high standard of proof, and for that reason , you almost never see successful perjury prosecutions in India OR the US (or England for that matter). As a result, it is very difficult to make statements like yours - there simply isn't enough data (and indeed, it is virtually impossible to gather the data - how will you find out - in any legal system - how many people lied under oath but were *not* prosecuted?). It is your choice whether or not to provide evidence to support your assertion. No doubt you know your assertion lacks credibility if you can't support it. As for me, I am an Advocate and I have practised law in India, California (briefly) and now England, so yes, you could say that I have "interacted" with the Indian legal system. Badri
