- 34,364
- 27,507
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2002
No. Justice is not blind. It's highly biased, and judgements/decisions of people with certain powers and positions are likeyly unjustly swayed based on certain factors that really should not play a part in the justice system. Skin color/ hair style, the way a person speaks, all play an indirect, subtle role in juror's and judges attitudes.
I was looking at my facebook and I saw that a 22 y/o white male chemistry teacher was arrested for sex with 2 students. Browsing through the comments, a few people said "it's not really his fault, he's just a few years older than them" and "whoever he did it with is just as much at fault as he is". I was floored. The people that made these comments were also white. Which got me to thinking, the people that made these comments do what most people do, defend someone that they relate to and identify with. Their arguments, while outlandish and ridiculous, are no different than people defending OJ, or Kobe, or Rusty Wallace simply because A) they are the same race and B) they like the person.
to sum it up, it's almost unfair that a defendant is placed before a a judge and juror that may already have a decision made before the case even begins. For justice to be truly blind, the defendant and any details that may identify certain traits should be withheld. Any comments should appear via text, or digitally altered voice. I understand that body language/eye contact etc play a part is the jury's decision, so the true "blind" aspect may be unattainable.
/rant.
I was looking at my facebook and I saw that a 22 y/o white male chemistry teacher was arrested for sex with 2 students. Browsing through the comments, a few people said "it's not really his fault, he's just a few years older than them" and "whoever he did it with is just as much at fault as he is". I was floored. The people that made these comments were also white. Which got me to thinking, the people that made these comments do what most people do, defend someone that they relate to and identify with. Their arguments, while outlandish and ridiculous, are no different than people defending OJ, or Kobe, or Rusty Wallace simply because A) they are the same race and B) they like the person.
to sum it up, it's almost unfair that a defendant is placed before a a judge and juror that may already have a decision made before the case even begins. For justice to be truly blind, the defendant and any details that may identify certain traits should be withheld. Any comments should appear via text, or digitally altered voice. I understand that body language/eye contact etc play a part is the jury's decision, so the true "blind" aspect may be unattainable.
/rant.
Last edited:
