We all have our right to our own opinion. It is our right via the US Constitution to have the right to freedom of speech. We don't however have to agree to other's opinion.
The other day I was reading this article (Our view: Anthony, Strauss-Khn escape rush of judgment) about the way people judge others too quickly. How it is isn't how the justice system should work. That convection should be solely based off of the facts and whether or not these facts add up to produce a case that the defendant is without a doubt guilty. I do agree with this part, that a courtroom isn't where popularity contests are held. A courtroom is a place of pure business.
Admittedly the only reason this article caught my attention is because it had the results of the Casey Anthony trial, which thanks to my Aunt I’ve been following it very heartedly. Being part of the author’s audience, I feel I must blog about his article.
The author puts up a nice fight with his claims and logic. He points out some cases from the past such as the Steven Hatfill case in which a governmental scientist’s career was “smeared” when he became a “person of interest” in the 2001 anthrax mailings, but was cleared when a judge found that there wasn’t any evidence linking him to it.
Or the other hundreds of cases that were convicted in courts all over the United States since 1973.
Or Richard Jewell, an innocent security guard who save countless lives after a bomb exploded at the 1996 Summer Olympics, only to find himself to be a person of interest in the case by the FBI for months.
What the author fails to do is give an example of cases in which all signs point to the defendant but they still get to walk away scot free. Such as the Casey Anthony case, were a single mother murdered her little girl, wrapped her in duck tape, and kept her in the trunk of her car for weeks before disposing of her body. And yet this horrid mother gets to walk away from this catastrophe.
No comments:
Post a Comment