I agree with you in general, but not in specific on this case. Rape is one of those hard to prove charges sometimes, as the difference between a yes or a no is the issue at hand. It's not that often that video or text proof exists. Our legal system is set up to err on the side of caution and would prefer to let a guilty man walk than imprison an innocent one.
These guys are guilty as sin though, through the legal book at them and maximum sentence their azzes.
Vigilante justice has no place in our society, and will and should be prosecuted.
We tend to agree and much of what you said is a relief after reading some of the pitchfork and torch toting insanity that I have read in here.
I would like to ask one question: how do you
know these guys are guilty as sin? If it is based on the jury's conclusion, there is an argument that is tainted by a juror who was completely incapable of objectivity due to her being a victim. Beyond that, have you personally seen the video of the crime, and not just circumstantial tidbits released to the media?
I personally
feel these guys are likely guilty, and that the evidence is probably pretty damning, but I refuse to draw conclusions based on what I am
told by the government or the media, and not what I
know. I do tend to hold the idea of innocent until proven guilty (and all of the intricacies associated with what that really means) pretty dear.
There was a fascinating three part series on HBO about the West Memphis Three called
Paradise Lost. It's about a gruesome crime and some kids who were very likely wrongly convicted, with one sent to death row, based on circumstantial evidence, community mob mentality (these kids were different, liked heavy metal, and wore black), etc. For those who have never spent much time actually involved in the legal system, it is a good primer on how quickly the government can do so much wrong trying to do so much right.
