Anyone searching for metaphors on how the courts deliver a decision, not justice, need go no further than the Casey Anthony case.
One may offer countless rationalizations: The jury wanted to go home, there was a reasonable doubt as there was no witness, there was no definitive motive, the television crime programs have raised the bar for evidence, people are uncomfortable with the death penalty. But this case was a battle between circumstantial evidence and innuendo. The family itself has been destroyed by the women's defense. Sexual abuse, conspiracy in an accidental death, perjury have been lightly raised as compliment to the heavy prosecution circumstantial suggestions.
The essence here is that this is a combat for victory, not truth, and the major weapon is uncertainty. The minor benefit is entertainment. Strangely, this culture is remarkably certain about a lot of difficult questions--global warming, WMDs, how to raise children, the effect of deficit spending--but when faced with a staggering imbalance of evidence, it defers.
Perhaps later, Casey and O.J. will meet and search for the two perpetrators together. A reality series may develop. Love may bloom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment