Thanks to all for supporting my column, it's hard to believe 14 months have gone by so quickly. Rarely in life have I had a job that seemed so effortless. This was not the case this past column as I found myself distracted by our community’s reaction to the murder of Lucinda Knoll.
I had intended to write this column to be printed this past Thursday, but when I explained the premise of the column, many believed it wouldn't be used. With a basis of private justice, controversial would likely be an understatement in describing my thoughts.
The common opinion seen online is that our community fears the murderer could use tricks of law to sidestep the punishment he deserves. Unfortunately, even if a judge or jury would wish to deal out the harshest of punishment, they are bound by the law that exists at that time. It's no secret that the law fails to properly punish criminals on a regular basis.
When a rapist, child molester or murdeerr is allowed to live only to be later released into our community, we have the right to be enraged. It only takes a few minutes online to find stories of local criminals that were either released only to offend again,or were not given the time they deserved for the crime that they had committed. It has also been observed that those with local power, those that can afford a good lawyer, and those in law enforcement, tend to get much more watered-down sentences than the common man. The common man wishes to see equal time for equal crime, which isn't what tends to happen. This highlights an unjust and flawed system, which can lead to people seeking true justice on their own.
The common consciences I have seen, leans in the direction of private justice. People fear this case will turn out, as many do, with the murderer being given what would be a slap on the hand, compared to the punishment our community would choose to employ. People aren't looking for this type of law for every case, but slam-dunk cases such as this. With our economy slipping and government throwing money away hand over fist, a small community such as ours tends to see no need for expensive and time consuming trials for such cases. To be honest, the most common statement that I have seen and heard is that bullets are cheap. In my mind, stones are free, so if were headed that direction, why not go old school?
Our system of law has been set up in an attempt to ensure the innocent go free. Law would rather see 99 criminals go free, than one innocent person be punished. The fact is that innocent people are still convicted on a regular basis, while criminals tend to reap the benefits of such law. I would personally rather see one innocent person punished than have 99 criminals walking the streets. Remember under the current form of law, the innocent are still being punished, so it obviously doesn't work. On the other hand, a vigilante force, devoid of law, would likely make the same type of mistakes, while reacting in the heat of the moment. The question is, where is the happy medium?
