A Question of Justice
By Hunter L. Thompson, 3rd Mar 2010 | Follow this author
| RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/1oohsxj_/
Posted in WikinutWritingEssays
How does a society determine justice in a tragic case? Is justice even possible?
What is Justice?
In being a bystander in the drama of the killing of a six month old baby by his 20 year old father, certain questions arise. What is justice and how is it achieved? Who gets hurt in these situations and how do we, as a society, cope?
I often wonder about our criminal justice system. What is our intent in the arrests, trials and incarcerations of those who violate our laws? When is what we do nothing more than vengeance? In many violent criminal situations how much are the officials who deal with them truly seeking justice? And for that matter what is justice?
One definition of justice is: Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness. Then who determines what is moral rightness? When each religion, each society differs so vastly in these definitions, which reigns supreme? There was a time when the code of conduct was determined by the prevailing religion in this country. Now we are a nation of diversity and the vast number of religions makes this impossible. There are some nations that are still one religion and their system of justice is determined by religious precepts.
It seems that, too often, in those nations the prevailing religion favors one group, mostly males. Women have second place and perhaps not even that. Often they are not much more than possessions of the closest male, whether father, husband or brother. So, as I see it, any form of justice in those societies is at best suspect because the humanity of the majority is disregarded.
What about a country like the U.S., where there is not one prevailing religion on which to base justice? We often what is referred to as Judeo/Christian ethics to determine justice. But how are these determined? In looking to the sources, both Old and New Testaments of the Bible, a person can wonder what constituted justice. Did God’s bringing of bears to tear 42 children to bit for insulting one of his prophets (Elisha) provide a good example of justice? What about Jesus stopping the stoning of the prostitute with the admonition, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”?
So, beyond the question of what constitutes justice is the question of what is the purpose of the punishment meted out by the courts? How does putting someone in jail restore property or, even more importantly, life? I am certainly in favor of this for those who deliberately kill another person. But what about the person who is driving along and accidentally hits a pedestrian? Is he guilty of murder? Or manslaughter? Or is it just a tragic accident?
Then there is the question of self-defense. If someone attacks me I believe I am justified in defending myself to whatever extent is necessary to preserve my life. But if I can’t prove my attacker was the aggressor, what then? If there are no witnesses, do I become a criminal? In these days of lack of safety in many neighborhoods this is a very valid question. And what if I stage an attack to get rid of someone? If I can make it look convincingly like I was attacked I may “get away with murder.”
How do 12 people sit in judgment on a person and not allow their personal feelings to intrude? If I were on a jury for the case of this father who killed his infant son could I remain “objective” (whatever that is) in hearing the case? Or would my feelings of horror for this innocent life take over? In this case where is justice?
Yes, the father killed the baby. And yet the father was 20 years old himself, a few decades ago he would not have been considered an adult. I am horrified by what he did. Given the extent of the child’s brain damage, it is best that he did not survive. There is no way that there is anything but tragedy in this situation. Who is guilty? The father certainly. What about the mother? If she knew her boyfriend was upset about having lost his job the week before should she have left the baby in his care? And the grandparents, where is there culpability? Their children, ages 19 and 20 have created a child, one with disabilities. Should they not have been more involved, especially when the father's job situation devolved? What about the neighbors? They knew the situation and yet did not step in to lend a hand. And society in general? What about social services? When a child is diagnosed with developmental disabilities and his parents are so young and not financially well off shouldn’t some social agency be involved?
It becomes a huge labyrinth. For then the question arises, what of personal freedom? If the parents didn’t want social services involved where is their rights to privacy and to handle their lives themselves? It just goes on and on.
And the final result is a baby who is dead and a young man who may spend the rest of his life in prison for what was, perhaps, a moment of total frustration. I cannot see justice in this at all, only tragedy.
Comments
5th Mar 2010 (#)
Thought provoking.You have hit a spot where society does not have answer.No.I think things like that are common in the animal kingdom, like the mother feeding the runt for the rest of the litter.
Reply to this comment
9th Mar 2010 (#)
Enjoyed reading this very topical essay. I would say that justice is an abstract and often conflicting theory within society. I find that there is an answer that is never taken and that is that all humanity wants protection from harm, it wants this particularly when the threat is to those it loves most - so remove the threat. In another age this might have meant the death penalty but now it should permanent exclusion. I am not advocating cruel or unnecessary acts but the simple act of taking the problem away. There are plenty of islands left in the world!
Reply to this comment