Thursday, July 7, 2011

Justice was properly done in Casey Anthony case?

Personally, I'm amused by the entire outcry. Justice (or at least law) is supposed to be blind and impartial, and that's exactly what happened. The jury came out saying there wasn't enough evidence to convict her. Public opinion is irrelevant: the law was served as it should have been. 

To all the people shouting about it, I'd like to ask a question: how would you feel if she was executed, then evidence came to light that she didn't do it? I bet all the people making noise right now would suddenly start shouting about how unfair the justice system had been, etc. 

If she admitted it, of course, she should be re-tried (confession is confession, after all, and someone would find a way to get her in court for it - or at least a vigilante would pop her). 

As for the publicity stuff, that's US culture for you. The land of unlimited opportunity, as long as you is willing to prostitute yourself for money.

Actually, under US constitution, she cannot be tried for this ever again. Even if after she is released, she were to stand on the court house steps and shout "I did it!" she could not be charged again for the same crime once found not guilty. 
Amendment 5 of our constitution states:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." 

So do you think Justice has been properly done?

No comments:

Post a Comment