Thought For the Day
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
At this point, is it even possible for Chauvin to get a trial by juror’s who have not developed an opinion on what happened?
Having an opinion is one thing. Being so biased that the opinion would not change no matter the evidence is another. In this case the fact that Juror 52 lied to get on the Chauvin jury indicates that he did so to carry out his pre-existing opinion that Chauvin was guilty of murder.
It doesn’t matter. We have returned to our roots as the witch-hunt nation. The process, justice, are just empty words to the citizenry, now only what matters is how they feel.
Everyone likes to quote from CS Lewis’ “Humanitarian Theory of Punishment” the lines about tyrants for our own good. They forget some of the other lines from it:
When you punish a man in terrorem, make of him an “example” to others, you are admittedly using him as a means to an end; someone else’s end. This, in itself, would be a very wicked thing to do. On the classical. theory of Punishment it was of course justified on the ground that the man deserved it. That was assumed to be established before any question of “making him an example” arose. You then; as the saying is, killed two birds with one stone; in the process
of giving him what he deserved you set an example to others. But take away desert and the whole morality of the punishment disappears. Why, in Heaven’s name, am I to be sacrificed to the good of society in this way?-unless, of course, I deserve it.
But that is not the worst. If the justification of exemplary punishment is not to be based on desert but solely on its efficacy as a deterrent, it is not absolutely necessary that the man we punish should even have committed the crime. The deterrent effect demands that the public should draw the moral, “If we do such an act we shall suffer like that man.” The punishment of a man actually guilty whom the public think innocent will not have the desired effect; the punishment of a man actually innocent will, provided the public think him guilty. But every modern State has powers which make it easy to fake a trial. When a victim is urgently needed for exemplary purposes and a guilty victim cannot be found, all the purposes of deterrence will be equally served by the punishment (call it “cure” if you prefer) of an innocent victim, provided that the public can be ~heated into thinking him guilty.
We have returned to our roots as the witch-hunt nation\
It was pointed out by Richard John Neuhaus some years back that the witch hunts in Salem lasted less than a year and the officials responsible covered themselves with sackcloth and ashes. How long were the Amiraults in prison? And did Scott Harsberger ever own up to a bloody thing? Do prosecutors or judges ever apologize for anything?
and the officials responsible covered themselves with sackcloth and ashes.
Not all of them did:
“Benedict Arnold is engaged upon other business,” said the stranger, with a glower. “Ah, you asked for a justice, I believe.”
He pointed his finger once more, and a tall man, soberly clad in Puritan garb, with the burning gaze of the fanatic, stalked into the room and took his judge’s place.
“Justice Hathorne is a jurist of experience,” said the stranger. “He presided at certain witch trials once held in Salem. There were others who repented of the business later, but not he.”
“Repent of such notable wonders and undertakings?” said the stern old justice. “Nay, hang them—hang them all!” And he muttered to himself in a way that struck ice into the soul of Jabez Stone.
It doesn’t matter. We have returned to our roots as the witch-hunt nation.
Were we ever the witch hunt nation? I know that’s a popular portrayal, but I don’t think it’s true. You could argue we’re becoming the witch hunt nation that those who insist we were a witch hunt nation apparently want us to become. But I don’t think I’d run with that appraisal of it being what we ever were..
Touche, @Dave G, I was in a dramatic mood this morning.
It does drive me mad watching people logic that “well we’re too smart to believe in witches, therefore we won’t make the same mistakes.” I’m so tired of trying to explain that just because it’s “nazis” you’re hunting now rather than “witches” doesn’t make it better.
Chauvin should of course go for every appeal. There is a small chance that it might actually work for him. But I fear that the only benefit that the appeals will have for society at large will be demonstrating how we are now a post-law society.