Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: thames_sider who wrote (4337)	3/22/2002 10:57:22 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 21057

I feel it may well be genuinely germane if an accused has been accused (especially if convicted) of a similar offence before The right to a presumption of innocence entails the right to be judged without prejudice. This is fundamental. As exasperating as it may sometimes be... It is in the sentencing and the release that the system loses all sense. Why is a man coming back after 27 rapes?? In my opinion, a person gets one chance at the same level of crime. When, or if, he/she is released for that crime, should he/she be convicted of another crime at the same or a greater level...then he/she will do DOUBLE the penalty as his/her previous. The problem with the system is, that when people choose to entertain human values outside of those which define their society--they do not suffer the natural consequences of their values. For example, the natural consequence of someone killing my daughter would be immediate death if I was there to see it. Unfortunately, the requirement of "impartial" justice is that justice be administered by the system...in order to avoid the mistakes which people are prone to in their own prejudice, incompetence, etc. The system is certainly not free of these things, but at least it operates under a carefully considered structure; EXCEPT, that after conviction, there ought to be something which equates in some manner with natural consequences and fundamental logic--and there is not. A rapist coming back 27 times before the court is not logical, and it is not a natural consequence of the values he has chosen. If he got 20 years for the first, he ought to get 40 years for the second: and he and every other citizen ought to know exactly what the consequences are in choosing values anathema to their community. Unfortunately, too many people make their living off of ensuring that the game is played in the dark... end of rant. :)