People study Law because that’s where the money is. At least that’s the most frequent answer I’ve heard, and I thank them for their honesty.
Although, I always confront them with the same question: Is Law as just as it claims to be? Is the court really a temple for the veneration of Justice, or is this just a theoretical, overly romanticized fantasy?
The truth of the matter is that evidence is what really matters. Clever criminals seem to use this fact to their advantage brilliantly, as they hire the “best” attorneys who are formidably skilled at destroying every trace of incriminating evidence. Where does this leave the innocent man, who, now, will appear to be a complete fool in front of His Excellency, since his accusation does not seem to have any substantial foundation?
The clever man, not accused of being a criminal anymore, happily hops out of the building, leaving the innocent man in ruins.
It is not a beautiful picture I have painted, and I can sit here, ranting and raving about it, but that wouldn’t help. S0 perhaps it would be more productive to ask questions and try to seek their answers.
What if there is simply not enough evidence to prove someone’s innocence? Yes, because being innocent isn’t what matters, proving it is what’s important. In this sense, the court isn’t there to defend someone, au contraire, the person in need of defense must prove to be worthy of it, again, by presenting evidence.
Evidence seems to be the currency in this community of Justice-makers, and like any other currency, it can easily be corrupted.
Witnesses can lie, and they can lie successfully, as long as there appears no evidence to prove otherwise.
Justice, then, can be attached to such clever lies, fat checks on the hands of the attorney, and freedom to those who cause harm to others.
I may hate the idea of this necessity for evidence, but the truth is that our senses have not proven to be so reliable as to judge whether someone is guilty or not. This, however, doesn’t mean that morals should stop at the door. After all, it is people’s lives we’re dealing with, not mere paperwork.
“Everyone is innocent until proven otherwise (vice versa)”, goes the saying. I, always on the con side, disagree. Being should be not be dictated by proof.