Quote:
Originally Posted by gstelmack
I only used it as a comparison about how guilty everyone can think the accused is until the ENTIRE story comes out in the trial. Yes, the Grand Jury report looks bad, and yes I believe it is LIKELY all this outrage will eventually be justified when the trial is over. But Grand Jury != Guilty, and we have a society built on "Innocent until proven Guilty". We have not heard all the evidence, and we have the prosecutor's view of what went on. Of course it's going to look horrible at this point.
The one thing going in favor of Grand Jury being right is we don't have the prosecutor out running this media campaign, which in the past has been a sure sign that the case is weak. But still, this country via the media is way to quick to rush to a judgement before all the evidence has come out. That's all I'm trying to say. Wait for the trial, THEN hang 'em all.
|
The government really can't be the arbiter of when we're allowed to react to things. They're too slow/inefficient/inaccurate at it. Think of all the other things we've accepted as a society that the government hasn't even chimed in on - they're limitless. Sure, we can be wrong sometimes, but I'd say our accuracy isn't any better or worse than the government's. And in this particular case, our available information is a lot stronger about certain facts is than any number of things we think we "know" about the world.
One of the nice things about a free country is that the accused can speak too. Yes, defense attorneys have culturally decided that nobody should ever say anything ever, up too and including during the trial. I suppose they believe that helps them have a more positive resolution in a criminal case, but I believe as a society, we're permitted to use that choice again them just like all the other information we have.