Sorry, but I really don't have much sympathy for somebody who beats up another person, even if the other person wronged them
Nor do I.
I do have sympathy with consequences being out of all proportion to the offense.
I spent 25 years in the military, my respect for, and adherence to, the Rule of Law is absolute. I also acknowledge that The Law cannot prescribe for all scenarios, we would never stop writing the case law. The Law has to be as clear cut and unambiguous as possible. The latter will never be perfect, human beings are complex beasts.
The provision for that is in sentencing and giving Judges the latitude to take into account circumstances. Many individuals are placed under suspended sentence for blowing away an unarmed intruder with the legal shotgun they had in the house. A direct parallel? Of course not, only an illustration of the principle of latitude, not insane strict adherence to the Rule of Law.
The Law in of itself is not there to dispense "justice", facilitate it for sure, but its not the principle methodology of dispensing Justice - Judges and Juries are. "Justice" is a subjective entity that depends on the moral code in vogue at the time in terms of right and wrong. The Rule of Law lays down "the rules of the game", Justice is the execution of the Rule of Law. Only Judges and Juries can do that.
Judges and Jurys are appointed by us to oversea what we consider to be morally correct, The Law cannot do that, our moral code and our sense of "Justice" is far too subjective and a moveable beast. In any case, as a crude illustration how do you describe the taste of Strawberries? You cant! In the same way, many aspects of our moral code are hard if not impossible to lay down in writing - back to the bureaucrats again..
The Law does not drive Justice, and god forbid it ever should. The Law would end up a never ending stream of bureaucratic self interest driven emotional guff. The Law is the bedrock for all decisions, not the decision itself - only a Judge and Jury can make decisions, and only a Judge and Jury can dispense Justice. It is a seemingly small but Hugely important principle, its not playing on words.
In SpacePony's case that principle is central to what happened to him. He broke the Law - as to his undying credit he has never denied - and there is no doubt some kind of sentencing for it was definitely appropriate (in my view a suspended sentence). In my view Justice was not served in his case, the consequences to him, with the sentence handed out in those particular unique circumstances, were far too high for the offense committed, and the Judge should have taken that into account. In that sense Justice was not served, and the System failed.
I hope his appeal succeeds, and sentencing changed to a reduced level. Not Guilty is not appropriate, a much reduced sentence due to the circumstances surrounding this particular case very definitely is, and should have been applied in the original Trial.
Regards
Zy
