Apparently, here in the E.U we're all guilty.. or not?

[Perinquus]

in many European countries you are not innocent until proven guilty, but guilty until found innocent

Could you please take this back since it is clearly your personal opinion and not a fact?

No, because it's part of the Napoleonic code, which is the basis for most European legal systems. Apparently, provisions of EU law have superseded this in many if not most European countries, but not all European countries are part of the EU, therefore some of them may still abide by this.

[Spoonist]

OK.
In that case name the European countries.
If you don't then your argument is totally moot.
Right now I can tell you that at least these countries practice "innocent until proven guilty" :
England
Germany
France
Belgium
Holland
Switzerland
Italy
Sweden
Denmark
Finland
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Ireland
Estonia
Latvia
So you don't have to check them.

But you can come back to us when you have find any.
http://europa.eu.int/documents/index_en.htm#eulaw

[Spoonist]

The only european countries that I could think that might have such legislature are the Vatican and the former soviet repucblics, but even then it is a stretch.

[Spoonist]

Made some searches and looked into things.
It seems that there is an anglo-american (UK,US,CAN,AUS,etc) misconception of european legal systems. This is the difference of the systems:
In anglo tradition you have a jury of peers.
In most european countries the 'jury' consists of the judge and some lawyers (numbers depending on country). This somehow leads to the misconception that you have to defend yourself vs the judge, that is false. There are a specific prosecutor and a specific defender whose job it is to present evidence pro or con. Without evidence you will not get a conviction.

[Spoonist]

in many European countries you are not innocent until proven guilty, but guilty until found innocent

Could you please take this back since it is clearly your personal opinion and not a fact?

No, because it's part of the Napoleonic code, which is the basis for most European legal systems. Apparently, provisions of EU law have superseded this in many if not most European countries, but not all European countries are part of the EU, therefore some of them may still abide by this.

Since you made the claim, the burden of proof lies with you. Unless you back it up I will consider your silence an acceptance that your claim was false.

So far the only democracies that I have found that are claimed to follow "guilty until proven innocent" are Mexico and Peru.

[Dahak]

Made some searches and looked into things.
It seems that there is an anglo-american (UK,US,CAN,AUS,etc) misconception of european legal systems. This is the difference of the systems:
In anglo tradition you have a jury of peers.
In most european countries the 'jury' consists of the judge and some lawyers (numbers depending on country). This somehow leads to the misconception that you have to defend yourself vs the judge, that is false. There are a specific prosecutor and a specific defender whose job it is to present evidence pro or con. Without evidence you will not get a conviction.

In Gemany, there's the judge, the prosecutor, and your lawyer (and you).

On lower-level courts, it's only the judge. On higher level courts, there are assisting "jurors" (normal people). They decide together on the verdict. And the number of judges can also increase on some higher-court instances.

And we specifically have "innocent until proven guilty".

[Vympel]

Innocent until proven guilty (which is an easier way of saying that the prosecution bears the burden of proof) is a tenet of international law anyway, so there's no danger from that quarter.