Post by guest on Jul 6, 2009 22:09:30 GMT -5
Two cases illustrate challenges of blind justice
The scales of justice challenge the blindfolded lady, who represents justice in the traditional poster. Nowhere has that challenge been more poignant than in two separate cases in Wednesday's (June 17) Enquirer.
In Miami, Fla., a celebrity, an NFL hero, had killed an innocent pedestrian while driving drunk. The charge carried a 15-year penalty under the law.
In Ohio, an obvious guilty, brutal, slayer of multiple victims, already convicted of capital murder, was in a clemency hearing.
Where does the blindfold come in in these two cases? What other facts should be weighed in each case, and which considerations should get a blind eye?
In Miami the wealthy wide receiver's attorney reached a settlement with the family of the victim and the family agreed to "put the matter behind them." He got 30 days in jail and the league is considering the possibility of a suspension without pay of "some games."
The blind eye of justice can be selective.
In the Ohio clemency hearing, the victim's family demanded execution in order to be "fair." An assistant Hamilton County prosecutor told the court that the defendant "is probably the most dangerous person on death row."
Defense counsel said that defendant will be proven to be 'mentally impaired." The defense attorney said that he will prove the defendant has an "organic brain injury" from a service-connected injury. It is now the law, ordered by the Supreme Court, that mentally impaired defendants cannot be executed no matter what the wishes of the family and prosecutor.
If we follow the law we will turn a blind eye to statements which are not probative evidence. The test should be the same in each case.
In some countries vengeance is a part of the law. In America it is not.
Or is it?
Thomas A. Luken is a former prosecutor, former congressman and former mayor and councilman for the city of Cincinnati.
news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009906200364
The scales of justice challenge the blindfolded lady, who represents justice in the traditional poster. Nowhere has that challenge been more poignant than in two separate cases in Wednesday's (June 17) Enquirer.
In Miami, Fla., a celebrity, an NFL hero, had killed an innocent pedestrian while driving drunk. The charge carried a 15-year penalty under the law.
In Ohio, an obvious guilty, brutal, slayer of multiple victims, already convicted of capital murder, was in a clemency hearing.
Where does the blindfold come in in these two cases? What other facts should be weighed in each case, and which considerations should get a blind eye?
In Miami the wealthy wide receiver's attorney reached a settlement with the family of the victim and the family agreed to "put the matter behind them." He got 30 days in jail and the league is considering the possibility of a suspension without pay of "some games."
The blind eye of justice can be selective.
In the Ohio clemency hearing, the victim's family demanded execution in order to be "fair." An assistant Hamilton County prosecutor told the court that the defendant "is probably the most dangerous person on death row."
Defense counsel said that defendant will be proven to be 'mentally impaired." The defense attorney said that he will prove the defendant has an "organic brain injury" from a service-connected injury. It is now the law, ordered by the Supreme Court, that mentally impaired defendants cannot be executed no matter what the wishes of the family and prosecutor.
If we follow the law we will turn a blind eye to statements which are not probative evidence. The test should be the same in each case.
In some countries vengeance is a part of the law. In America it is not.
Or is it?
Thomas A. Luken is a former prosecutor, former congressman and former mayor and councilman for the city of Cincinnati.
news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009906200364