Absolute power corrupts absolutely?
Last night I watched Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. Honestly, I’ve NEVER watched this show before; I guess I’ve always thought it’s too heavy for me to digest after a long day at work.
But I was playing Spider Solitaire using the notebook, which happened to be in the TV area. So whether I wanted or otherwise, I can hear what’s showing on the tube, which of course turned out to be Law & Order: SVU.
What an episode it was.
A Judge Taft apparently has been passing judgment even before all the facts were presented by both prosecutor and defendant. It seems like this judge made his decision based on what he sees – and he decided a person’s innocence (or if he's guilty) based on the outer appearance (what’s their jobs, where they live, what kind of society they’re in).
In one case, this Judge Taft judged a mother – who was a hooker – guilty of causing the death of her daughter. In reality, it was a wrongly prescribed medication at the hospital that caused the girl to die.
In another case, Judge Taft let a woman walk free. In the end, this woman (who happened to be slightly psycho, I believe) murdered her child who’s down with illness. He gave the verdict of “Not guilty” because he thought this woman and her husband were nice people.
My personal thought of a judge? I think they shoulder this huge burden, where they have the power to deem another human being innocent or guilty. That’s huge power to be held in the palms of a person.
What if not all facts were presented? What if either the defendant or the prosecutor didn’t do their job well, or didn’t present those facts well? An innocent man could be sentenced behind bars. A person who has committed serious crimes could be walking free on the streets.
A judge has got to have a conscience, and live with what he has decided about other people, for the rest of his life. Let him be a person of high ethics, and holds on to his principles. Let him be a person of clear sense of responsibility and holds the highest esteem for honesty.
And let the saying “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” stays a saying. Not a fact.
But I was playing Spider Solitaire using the notebook, which happened to be in the TV area. So whether I wanted or otherwise, I can hear what’s showing on the tube, which of course turned out to be Law & Order: SVU.
What an episode it was.
A Judge Taft apparently has been passing judgment even before all the facts were presented by both prosecutor and defendant. It seems like this judge made his decision based on what he sees – and he decided a person’s innocence (or if he's guilty) based on the outer appearance (what’s their jobs, where they live, what kind of society they’re in).
In one case, this Judge Taft judged a mother – who was a hooker – guilty of causing the death of her daughter. In reality, it was a wrongly prescribed medication at the hospital that caused the girl to die.
In another case, Judge Taft let a woman walk free. In the end, this woman (who happened to be slightly psycho, I believe) murdered her child who’s down with illness. He gave the verdict of “Not guilty” because he thought this woman and her husband were nice people.
My personal thought of a judge? I think they shoulder this huge burden, where they have the power to deem another human being innocent or guilty. That’s huge power to be held in the palms of a person.
What if not all facts were presented? What if either the defendant or the prosecutor didn’t do their job well, or didn’t present those facts well? An innocent man could be sentenced behind bars. A person who has committed serious crimes could be walking free on the streets.
A judge has got to have a conscience, and live with what he has decided about other people, for the rest of his life. Let him be a person of high ethics, and holds on to his principles. Let him be a person of clear sense of responsibility and holds the highest esteem for honesty.
And let the saying “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” stays a saying. Not a fact.
posted by Yam @ 9:50 am
<< Home