Originally Posted by RazorSharpe

Yes Nathan and the further burden of proof continues to lie with the accuser. You can claim someone had intent to murder another but you still need to prove it. This isn't any different. I'm not sure why you are taking such an aggressive stance on this especially considering that a court of law will not just find a defendant guilty without due process. So no "innocent" surfers are getting unjustly punished here; in fact some not so innocent surfers may even get a walk if their accusers cannot put together a strong enough case.

Given all of the above, I would be really interested in understanding what exactly is making you so angry with this line of protection? What aspect of it do you find ethically wrong? Please understand that I am not bashing you, I am merely trying to understand your point of view.