Sunday, July 10, 2011
Is there justice in America's judicial system?
In light of the recent Casey Anthony trial and verdict, I thought it would be interesting to take a closer look at the structure of the U.S. judicial system. Under the sixth amendment to the United States Constitution, those charged with a particular crime have the right to a speedy, public trial, by a jury of their peers. As most people probably know, during a trial, the burden of proof rests with the prosecution while it is the job of the defense to prove that there is reasonable doubt in the case the prosecution is presenting. According to this standard, I personally believe that prosecuting attorneys have a much more difficult job than defense attorneys because it takes very little to prove reasonable doubt. In listening to a recent interview on one of the cable news networks, one of the lawyers for the prosecution stated that jurors might have had reasonable doubt that Casey could have killed her daughter because Caylee was capable of opening the back door to the home she shared with her grandparents and could have accidentally fell into the pool on her own and drowned. Although this most likely didn't happen, if this scenario is presented in court to a jury, you can see how this could create doubts in the minds of some jurors that Casey was responsible for the murder of Caylee. If there is any sliver of doubt in the minds of jurors, they have a responsibility not to convict according to the U.S. Constitution even though in their hearts and minds they believe she is guilty. I am not saying I agree or disagree with the decision of the jury, but I do believe they did their job to the best of their ability as they understood it according to law. Whenever a jury in a high profile case reaches a verdict that is unpopular in the eyes of the American people, questions will always arise as to whether our system is fair and just. I can sympathize with those who feel as though justice was not done for Caylee. Cases such as this put America's judicial system squarely in the spotlight and under a great deal of scrutiny. Is trial by jury the best way to determine one's guilt or innocence? If trial by jury is not the best way to determine one's fate, what is? Despite the injustice of the verdict in the eyes of many, it is always important to never lose sight of the fact that we live in a wonderful nation with so many freedoms, not the least of which is to have our fate placed in the hands of our peers rather than a ruthless dictator.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Our judicial system is flawed and inefficient and not really fair. Of course it is more efficient, more fair, and superior to any other judicial system past or present. I can't foresee a better one this side of the second coming of Christ.
ReplyDelete