English 101 Mr. Young 13 March 2012 Is definitely Justice Genuinely Blind? The us of America bases the whole judicial system around “blind justice” but is justice often blind? Since day one, rights has been pictured as unbiased. Ronald Nikkel says the U.
S judicial system is displayed by an elegant lady possessing a set of weighing machines in one side and a sword in her additional, while wearing a blindfold.
The girl carries the balances as a symbol of fairness as well as the sword symbolizing power and authority, and she wears the blindfold, symbolizing objective justice for all those people, without preference or perhaps discrimination, regardless of identity, prosperity, power, social status, placement, or instances (“Justice is definitely not Blind”). However , is this always the case? In countless cases, the verdict will not seem like Lady Rights is truly impaired. No matter what is said, trial by jury has its flaws.
The article “Justice is Not Blind” says, “It isn’t only the accused who can always be wrongfully treated by the justice system, subjects also undergo the consequence of injustice when wealthy offenders with powerful cable connections simply get a slap within the wrist rather than being held accountable to face the effects of their crimes” (Nikkel). Flaws in the jury system influence everyone. The judicial program needs to reformed, society has developed over time, the judicial method has not retained up.
Rights needs to be refrained from bias, in which fairness is not only a forensic technicality and where consideration is the same for all folks regardless of race, religion, creed, or cultural standing (Nikkel). The most notorious example of our corrupt legislativo system is the trial of Orenthal David Simpson often known as O. L. Simpson. The O. T. Simpson homicide trial is among the most controversial court cases in the last decade. In 1995 O. T. Simpson was put on trial for the murders of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson and her male friend Richard Goldman. From the outside seeking in many persons thought Um.
J. Simpson was obviously guilty. A lot incriminating evidence was identified. Douglas Linder says, locks evidence, bloodstream evidence, dietary fiber evidence, baseball glove evidence, and shoe data was every brought in entrance of the Court (“The U. J. Simpson Trial”). With the much data pointing to him, many Americans were specific O. T. was the guilty of murder. Mr. Simpson acquired something that a large number of people did not, cold hard cash. O. J. had the cabability to assemble a great all-star defense team. The media known it since the “Dream Team”, that consisted of nine high profile attorneys.
Douglas Linder figures Simpson’s defense team cost between $3 million and $6 million dollars (“The U. J. Simpson Trial”). To. J’s protection team worked diligently to boost doubt about every part of evidence that was helped bring forth, and it worked. The article “O. J. Simpson Trial” says, As America watched for 10 a. m. PST on Oct 3, 1995, Ito’s clerk, Deidre Robertson, announced the jury’s decision: “We the jury inside the above entitled action discover the accused, Orenthal David Simpson, simple of the criminal offenses of murder” (Linder).
Various people came away from the trial with the impression that money is going to buy you justice in america. Money provides bought freedom throughout record in the United States. Recently Cleveland Browns wide device Donte Stallworth killed a guy while drunk driving. In content published by Globe Journal it says vehicular murder is a crime charge that upon conviction will result in a sentence of between 3 and 15 years of imprisonment with no parole for at least 12 months (Magee). Three years is the minimal for vehicular homicide. Stallworth received thirty days in imprisonment and couple of years house arrest.
Stallworth was playing over the following Browns football game. The primary reason Stallworths phrase was thus light was, Donte reached a confidential financial pay out with Reyes’ family. How much does this say for people who dedicate crimes and therefore are unable to pay off their subjects? Debbie Shussel says that, contrary to the trite adage, proper rights isn’t blind in America. It’s not sightless at all. For those who have the right money amounts inside your bank account, you get a separate sort of “justice” placed on you (“Yes, You Can Buy Rights in America”). This was the most blatant screen of tainted justice in recent times.
According to an article in USA Today, Donte Stallworth was extremely cooperative with authorities and remorseful through the process and this correlated with his sentence (Davis). Many people are remorseful and supportive after choosing someone’s existence with their irresponsible actions, and still given hard penalties. It can be clear that money will indeed acquire you proper rights in the United States of America. It is often said that America has the ideal criminal justice system that you can buy. Paul Wright states, after more than 16 years in penitentiary I have but to meet anyone that was wealthy when they had been convicted.
I actually long ago concluded that what people did, in the way of criminal activity, had simply no bearing upon whether they reached prison Wealth is the determining factor (“The Crime penalized Poor”). The United States of America judicial method is extremely biased, a change is desperately needed. Several may disagree with this and insist it is the criminal conduct in the poor that leads to incarceration but the proof indicates otherwise. Paul Compose wrote, yesteryear two decades offers seen above 100 people exonerated and released by death line after staying convicted and sentenced to death.
Through the same period, hundreds in the event that not thousands more had been released from prison following being exonerated of the crimes they were convicted of. The causes for the wrongful convictions range from authorities and prosecutorial misconduct, unskilled defense counsel, fabricated evidence, lying down jailhouse snitches and wrongly diagnosed eyewitnesses, amongst others. Yet I possess not been aware of any wealthy defendants who had been wrongly found guilty and sentenced to loss of life or prison as a result. Rather, wrongful dedication of the factually innocent seems to be the exclusive province of the poor (“The Crime of Being Poor”).
This eyewitness consideration proves the actual, people are being released from prison after the system realizes these people were convicted on false charges. People of a lower social class happen to be convicted of almost anything. Prosperous people are certainly not convicted intended for anything, except if, they were captured red-handed. In a country just like America, contencioso corruption should not be a problem such as this. Ronald Nikkel said Proper rights needs to be done without bias, in which fairness is not just a forensic technicality and where account is the same for all persons regardless of race, religion, creed, or social standing (“Justice is Certainly not Blind”).
Many people believe this is how the United States Contencioso system functions. This is not the truth. The United States of America is a great country, the individuals have the ability to make decisions inside the government. People of the United States must come together and impose a well needed reform on the biased judicial program. Works offered Davis, Nate. “Has justice been dished up in the Donte’ Stallworth circumstance? ” USA Today. And. p., 6 July 2009. Web. twenty-two Oct. 2012. Jenkins, Courtenay. “, Trial by Jury’ Guilty of Character Flaws. inches Daily Press. N. g., n. deb. Web. 13 Oct. 2012. Linder, Douglas O. “The O. L.
Simpson Trial. ” University of Missouri , Kansas City. N. l., 14 January. 2006. World wide web. 21 Oct. 2012. Magee, Dennis. “Woman gets 10-year sentence for vehicular murder. ” World Gazette. Experiencing Association, your five June 2012. Web. twenty two Oct. 2012. Nikkel, Ronald W. “Justice Is Certainly not Blind. inches Prison Fellowship. Prison Fellowship, 7 Oct. 2011. Net. 13 Oct. 2012. Ogletree, Charles L., Jr. “The Trial’s Value and Long lasting Impact. ” Public Broadcasting Service. D. p., your five Apr. 2005. Web. 13 Oct. 2012. Wright, Paul. “The Offense of Being Poor. ” Jail Legal Reports. N. l., 22 April. 2012. World wide web. 22 April. 2012.