Ok, a quick point on a case I never thought I'd ever post on, a case I didn't follow, a case which either caused me to flip the channel or pause the news for a few minutes so I could then zoom past it - which I suppose I do with nearly all 'Media Courtroom Cases'. But with that being said... there's something to be said about the matter which is currently going under the name of the 'Casey Anthony Murder Trial'.
I heard the Mom's story; do I think she's guilty? Yes. Does that matter? It had better not! It doesn't matter what you or I or any of the public think, and it shouldn't matter. Was she guilty? That's not the issue - she was found not guilty in a court of law, that's the issue.
Justice, in a Just society, is not about the judgment of one person, a dozen people or the entire population, Justice is about the system of justice, which should require an orderly presentation of information, information which has to pass objective rules of evidence and order, and be argued according to reasonable rules of conduct in an adversarial arrangement. The only 'Trial' news worth hearing, IMHO, is whether or not the procedures of the judicial system were followed. If they were, then as far as society is concerned, justice was done.
Why? Because only the guilty person and God know what really happened - and they aren't talking.
That means we need to have a system which all of us can trust... a system where we can believe we'd have the fairest possible chance ourselves if we were ever caught up in it, where the accused, and the accuser, are both allowed to make their best case, so that a jury of their peers can evaluate it - in accordance with those same rules - in order to render their best, most justifiable, conclusion, the verdict of having been found to be Guilty, or Not Guilty, based upon the rules of evidence presented in a court of law.
That is the best that can be hoped for in society, and as far as society is concerned, that IS Justice. Could the jury have been wrong about whether she truly killed her daughter or not? Sure, no jury is perfect. You know what? Neither are you. Or me. With that fact in mind, the best we can do is set up a system that is Just, and follow it, even and especially when we feel a particular judgment is wrong.
The alternative? See any third world country for evidence of blood lust and vendettas waged by those who are deeply convinced they are pursuing and seeing that 'justice' will be done. Or read Aeschylus’s ’The Orestia’ to see why and how the West tamed the Furies and left that nightmare of savagery behind.
Do you sort of agree with all of that but want to argue whether the people of the jury, the attorneys or the judge were up to the task of carrying out and implementing our system of Justice?
That's a matter you should take up with what you and your society considers, or neglects to consider, to be the purpose of Education. Once you've settled upon what Education is for, then and only then, take a look at whether or not your educational system is up to putting that purpose into practice upon your children and society... including juries ability to follow arguments in your judicial system. Hint: Your societies impression of what the purpose of Education is - sucks. Consequently, the educational system really sucks. And because of that, we get attorneys, judges and juries who are perhaps prone to, or even incapable of anything but, gross miscarriages of justice.
But that's beside the point, isn't it?
Do I think she's guilty? Yep, guilty as hell.
Does that matter? Nope, thank God.
Our society, however diminished, is still one governed by the Rule of Law and not one driven by the impassioned feelings of men, and that right there, is true justice in action.