Lately in discussions regarding the Casey Anthony thing, I have heard the phrase "Well I believe in an eye for an eye..." as if that means something or is even pertinent to the discussion at hand. When I hear this I want to respond with "Oh did we somehow go back in time 4,000 years? Is this Ancient Babylonia? Are we worshiping Marduk and should I prepare a pleasing sacrifice?"
Modern societies, progressive and free societies do not adhere to the Hammurabic Code anymore. The laws of modern, progressive, free societies have become more subtle and nuanced with reagrds to criminal law, reflecting what we know about human behavior, and it si really for the better. An eye for an eye was a good start for law, it was a foundation. But since then society has evolved, and modern law is to an eye for an eye as a modern human is to it's single celled ancestor.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Yeah i am a lazy blogger, but here are my thoughts on this Casey Anthony verdict
Well the Casey Anthony trial just ended. Not guilty. And before I go on a rant here let me say, I think she may have done it.
But I am glad she was found Not Guilty. Here is why: When a prosecutor brings a death penalty case, or any case for that matter to court they have to have irrefutable evidence. It is their failure to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt that led to this verdict. PERIOD. It doesn't matter how the public felt, it doesn't matter what the media felt. If the prosecution cannot prove their case, the accused, whether they committed the crime or not should be acquitted. This is the price of a free society. And it is a heavy one.
If you find that this is not justice, then I politely invite you to go live in North Korea or China. There a prosecutor doesn't have to prove a damn thing. There if your accuser is a representative of the government you are guilty, regardless of the fact that you actually committed the crime or not.
I myself like the fact that our justice system works the way it works. I prefer a justice system that lets off 100 guilty people rather than convicting a single innocent person (which, unfortunately, happens anyway).
But I am glad she was found Not Guilty. Here is why: When a prosecutor brings a death penalty case, or any case for that matter to court they have to have irrefutable evidence. It is their failure to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt that led to this verdict. PERIOD. It doesn't matter how the public felt, it doesn't matter what the media felt. If the prosecution cannot prove their case, the accused, whether they committed the crime or not should be acquitted. This is the price of a free society. And it is a heavy one.
If you find that this is not justice, then I politely invite you to go live in North Korea or China. There a prosecutor doesn't have to prove a damn thing. There if your accuser is a representative of the government you are guilty, regardless of the fact that you actually committed the crime or not.
I myself like the fact that our justice system works the way it works. I prefer a justice system that lets off 100 guilty people rather than convicting a single innocent person (which, unfortunately, happens anyway).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)