[MaidInBedlam]

The difference between Law and Justice is a subject I often consider I see courts give convicted criminals sentences that amount to a slap on the hand. I see protests where people are carrying signs and chanting "No Justice, No Peace" and I pity them because Law so rarely metes out Justice.

I want to get on a very tall soapbox and try to point this out. The people who demonstrate using that slogan are sincerely protesting against wrong(s) that are glaringly unjust, illegal, and seem to have become embedded in how the Law is applied.

I don't know what the solution to this problem is but I think it's worthy of discussion. I hope those of you who believe as I do will join me here.

 

[not enough yarn]

What it comes down to is how good of a lawyer you have.

 

[Aunt Nay]

An interesting topic, I suspect it will be moved to non-knitting talk. Foundational to this discussion is a definition of the terms. I submit the following for law:
"The system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties."

Aay definition for justice will likely be much more subjective and personal. There is a lot of emotion attached to our various ideas of justice.

 

[clickerMLL]

Generally, one should go to the courthouse and review the entire file (available to all in the circuit clerk's office at no charge unless you want copies to take home). Then, attend the trial. Every bit of it. If the defendant pleads guilty, attend the hearing for that. Also, attend any post-trial proceedings. A review of the pertinent sentencing statutes and guidelines is necessary to know the limitations put on the judge by the legislature. Until one knows the entire case, one is really not in a position to state whether "justice" is done. Finally, we all need to realize that the press reports are never complete or unbiased, that prison space is limited, and that our ideas of "justice" vary from person to person. HOWEVER, I happen to agree that "justice" -- at least, my personal take on it -- is elusive and not always accomplished.

 

[susanmos2000]

I suppose one of the problems is that judges are bound to some degree to sentencing guidelines--that is, ten years for simple burglary, fifteen for aggravated assault (just throwing out numbers as examples--no idea what the real ones are). Ten years may be the perfect sentence for someone who commits a particular crime--too harsh for another--much too lenient for a third.

 

[SQM]

And money.

Mrs. Somma - you got it right there as did the poster who mentioned a good lawyer. I only know of one millionaire family from Finland whose disturbed grown son got caught up in the justice system for stabbing his bro and unfortunately, the parents were not familiar with justice in America and did not find a good and expensive lawyer fast enough. So the 'justice' system 'cured' the son in a state forensic mental hospital and now he is 'okay' to stand trial. So money and good lawyer are critical along with some savvy on using the 'justice' system.

 

[Designer1234]

My problem is (and I am speaking of the States as trials are rarely if ever on the internet here,) is the fact that so much information about both the victim and the supposed perpetrator is not allowed. It seems to me much fairer if information is brought into trial about other similar actions of the accused which might show more of the real personality and reasons he or she might have or might not have had.It would give more of a true idea of the accused and whether that person has a history that fits the crime committed.

It seems a lot of trials don't allow any information of previous crimes or activities pertinent to the crime on trial. jmo. It amazes me how many judges decide to leave important information out and don't allow it. Another judge might allow it.

 

[mirium]

For those of us who live in a democracy (which is most of here, I think), the law is what we decide it should be. If we don't like the ones we have, we can contact our legislators, we can vote, we can protest, we can persuade others that it should be changed so they do the same. The people you elect are working fulltime to make better laws, and they're the people that the majority of voters agreed with.

But the law is a system, and humans aren't perfect, so it isn't as simple as it might seem to write good ones. For example, most folks probably agree it's a bad idea to drive really fast -- so pass a law against speeding. But what about the father who's rushing his child to the emergency room? Pass a law that makes an exception for emergencies? Okay, do you take the driver's word for it that there's an emergency? If not, when and how does the driver prove there was an emergency? What if it turned out to be a false alarm (say, a pregnant woman thought she was giving birth but it was those early contractions)? What if your idiot neighbor pretends to have an emergency and you drive him to the ER -- who gets the ticket? Easy to decide on the spot, but laws have to be written long before the event happens.

I don't know the solution either, but part of it is for people to pay attention to their government, vote, get involved, and keep in mind that laws have to apply to everyone all the time so everyone knows what they're supposed to do. It's not as easy as it looks.

 

[Kathie]

An interesting topic, I suspect it will be moved to non-knitting talk. Foundational to this discussion is a definition of the terms. I submit the following for law:
"The system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties."

Any definition for justice will likely be much more subjective and personal. There is a lot of emotion attached to our various ideas of justice.

I think this is correct. So many times sentences look very wrong to me but that's my sense of justice. Things do seem to be determined by how good you lawyer is, and if you can afford a good one things seem to go much better for you though.

 

[Wombatnomore]

An interesting topic, I suspect it will be moved to non-knitting talk. Foundational to this discussion is a definition of the terms. I submit the following for law:
"The system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties."

Aay definition for justice will likely be much more subjective and personal. There is a lot of emotion attached to our various ideas of justice.

And no emotion in Law. Not a zip. It really is black and white.

I agree with Aunt Nay that emotion lies in justice but not the law.

 

[susanmos2000]

OK, what does everyone think about that guy who was sentenced to stand on a street corner for a specified amount of time with placard listing his crimes? (serious and prolonged harassment of a neighbor with disabled children). Did the punishment fit the crime?

( Image and link below)

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-holding-i-am-bully-sign-jeered-neighbors-n79301

 

[theyarnlady]

I have been on jury, the suit that was brought up was just a frivolous and cog the justice system.

One that I think of is the lady who spill coffee and sued MC Donlads for and won a considerably amount of money.

Then there is the teacher who rape an 14 year old girl and was let go.

You can kill a person and get less then 10 years.

But steal something and serve more time then what is stolen

So much information is not allowed for juries to see, that decisions are not made as to what is really right.

Justice is truly blind, at least that is what I have seen and read.

 

[mirium]

.... so much information about both the victim and the supposed perpetrator is not allowed. It seems to me much fairer if information is brought into trial about other similar actions of the accused which might show more of the real personality and reasons he or she might have or might not have had. It would give more of a true idea of the accused and whether that person has a history that fits the crime committed.

The reason they do that is that the person isn't on trial for being a Bad Person -- they're on trial for a specific crime. Past acts would be useful, but would also prejudice the jury. There are exceptions to the "no past behavior" rule, such as "state of mind" evidence -- for example, that the accused thinks anyone who waves is trying to hit her, so she thought she was being attacked and acted in self-defense. But those exceptions are always about what was going on in the specific event that's on trial, not about general personality or behavior.

 

[SQM]

I have been on jury, the suit that was brought up was just a frivolous and cog the justice system.

One that I think of is the lady who spill coffee and sued MC Donlads for and won a considerably amount of money.

Then there is the teacher who rape an 14 year old girl and was let go.

You can kill a person and get less then 10 years.

But steal something and serve more time then what is stolen

So much information is not allowed for juries to see, that decisions are not made as to what is really right.

Justice is truly blind, at least that is what I have seen and read.

There was a documentary about the coffee lady called "Hot Coffee", I think. She got 3 degrees burn all over her groin area and thighs. She never fully recovered. McDonalds had a policy of making coffee as hot as 180 degrees. Hers was not the only suit. Many others were horribly scalded. All that case shows is how the big corporations can manipulate the media to make the little person look ridiculous.

 

[susanmos2000]

There was a documentary about the coffee lady called "Hot Coffee", I think. She got 3 degrees burn all over her groin area and thighs. She never fully recovered. McDonalds had a policy of making coffee as hot as 180 degrees. Hers was not the only suit. Many others were horribly scalded. All that case shows is how the big corporations can manipulate the media to make the little person look ridiculous.

That's interesting--I didn't realize that the lava-hot coffee was official policy. Rather, I just assumed that someone slapped a pot of lukewarm coffee on the grill to heat it up quickly (which is exactly what we used to do back in the 80s, when I took an after-school job at the local McDonalds)

 

[Huckleberry]

The biggest problem I see is that the Jury does not get ALL of the information it should. Too much lawyering also. Lying Lawyers are too often at the Pulpit.

 

[MaidInBedlam]

An interesting topic, I suspect it will be moved to non-knitting talk. Foundational to this discussion is a definition of the terms. I submit the following for law:
"The system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties."

Aay definition for justice will likely be much more subjective and personal. There is a lot of emotion attached to our various ideas of justice.I agree that the definition of justice is very subjective and personal. I think you could ask a hundred people what their definition of the word "justice" is and get nearly a hundred different answers.

I've started this topic in General Chit-Chat where I think it belongs. I hope I've put it where it should be.When I looked up the definition of "justice", I liked the following list of usages best:

1. Even, it [justice] is as the sun on a flat plain; uneven, it strikes like the sun on a thicket —Malay proverb

2. Injustice … gathers like dust under everything —Rainer Maria Rilke

3. inevitable as the law of cause and effect —L. P. Hartley

4. Justice is like a train that’s nearly always late —Yevgeny Yevtushenko

5. Justice is like the kingdom of God; it is not without us as a fact, it is within us as a great yearning —George Eliot

6. Shed justice like paladins —Jonathan Valin

7. The tongue of the just is as choice silver —The Holy Bible/Proverbs

8. An unrectified case of injustice has a terrible way of lingering … like an unfinished equation —Mary McCarthy

9. We will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream —Martin Luther King Jr., speech, June 15, 1963
(This is from King’s famous “I Have a Dream” speech.)

10. Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains. Your judgments are like the great deep —The Holy Bible/Psalms

 

[MaidInBedlam]

Generally, one should go to the courthouse and review the entire file (available to all in the circuit clerk's office at no charge unless you want copies to take home). Then, attend the trial. Every bit of it. If the defendant pleads guilty, attend the hearing for that. Also, attend any post-trial proceedings. A review of the pertinent sentencing statutes and guidelines is necessary to know the limitations put on the judge by the legislature. Until one knows the entire case, one is really not in a position to state whether "justice" is done. Finally, we all need to realize that the press reports are never complete or unbiased, that prison space is limited, and that our ideas of "justice" vary from person to person. HOWEVER, I happen to agree that "justice" -- at least, my personal take on it -- is elusive and not always accomplished.

While what you say makes good sense, I can't imagine that very many people have the tie to do as you suggest.

 

[susanmos2000]

The biggest problem I see is that the Jury does not get ALL of the information it should. Too much lawyering also. Lying Lawyers are too often at the Pulpit.

Lying, yes--and intentionally uninformed. Sad to say my oldest brother learned to operate that way as an attorney. He was in charge of selling our mother's house, and one day when I started to tell him about a pipe that had just sprung a leak he put his finger to his lips and told me not to say another word--he didn't want to know.

 

[MzKnitCro]

I can't feel sorry for him, I just hope that he changes his ways.

OK, what does everyone think about that guy who was sentenced to stand on a street corner for a specified amount of time with placard listing his crimes? (serious and prolonged harassment of a neighbor with disabled children). Did the punishment fit the crime?

( Image and link below)

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-holding-i-am-bully-sign-jeered-neighbors-n79301