abacacus wrote:
That's a very dangerous thing. When you put so much trust in to a fallible system you're bound to be screwed by it in the end.
Perhaps so, but at the same time the courts are a codified system that is integral for the maintaining of order. When a person is tried by a court of law, they are subject to a series of universal pre-established legal procedures that aim to determine whether or not the person is guilty of the crime of which he/she has been accused; and to determine the proper form of punishment and/or reparation if a guilty verdict is reached. The procedures followed in the courtroom and the rights granted to the accused - right of protection against self-incrimination, right to counsel with legal expert, right to be tried by a jury of his or her peers - these all exist to prevent a person's own opinions, regardless if they are civilian or part of the law enforcement/criminal justice complex, from influencing a verdict. Does it always work? No. Are people screwed over when it fails? Certainly. But the important thing to remember is that courtroom procedures are generally the same for everyone in this country (though there may be slight differences in state and local courts from place to place), regardless of their history, the crime they are accused of, and their demographic identity (age, gender, race, religion, etc.). Courtroom decisions are not arbitrary, they are the resolution of extensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding a crime. If the courts didn't exist, and we relied on law enforcement and/or the public to determine the fate of the accused, the actions of idealistic vigilantes and prejudiced enforcers would cause a swift descent into anarchy.
While I do agree that having absolute faith in the court system is naive, I will still respect the decision made by any court in this country, because they have the final say in legal matters. I may not like the decision, I may think it to be unfair, but I will go under the assumption that all courtroom procedures have been followed to the letter, and that this is the end result. After all, there are procedures to appeal a court decision by having a higher court examine the case and determine if the court followed procedure, and to re-try the case if not. I believe that any given case can only be analyzed and double-checked so many times, and that if a person has exhausted all possible chances at an appeal that if there was a mistake that could have proved their innocence, it would have been found before now.
It's not a perfect system, but if we cannot abide by it and attempt to act on our own, defying the rule of law and order, then we won't be doing society any favors.
_________________
"Yeah, so this one time, I tried playing poker with tarot cards... got a full house, and about four people died." ~ Unknown comedian
Happy New Year from WP's resident fortune-teller! May the cards be ever in your favor.
12 Apr 2012, 1:45 pm
