I finished reading the morning papers and after digesting all of the letters to the editor, I have come to the conclusion that we can save a lot of money by simply getting rid of all of the judges and juries. It was quite apparent that most of the writers already knew the TRUTH. I'm not sure how they knew...even though they were never in the courtrooms, never saw or heard the evidence. Yet they knew! In some cases, there hadn't been any legal action taken...but the writers knew who was guilty and who was not.
Sorry. I keep forgetting that Letters to the Editor are found on the Opinion pages; not to be confused with the "real news" pages...and where is this blog found? On the Opinion pages of the internet.
Grandpa, if we were mot judged by an elected official and our peers, we would not have the ability to prove ourselves innocent. What you are reading and what writers are writing is their opinion, and since they were not actually present when the act in question was committed, how can they make judgement? I suggest that you watch The Ox-Bow Incident, an old movie with Henry Fonda. You may just change your attitude. The opinion of the masses is not the ethical decision that judges are supposed to provide.
ReplyDeleteDear "Anonymous"...you didn't recognize satire. Notice that I did say the letters were "opinion".
ReplyDeleteAnd my opinion in a nutshell? People who write letters to the editor and claim to know that someone is guilty and/or innocent are deserving of extreme punishment...such as having the Harvard Law Review read to them every day, in its entirety by a little old librarian with a squeaky voice!
oh dear, guess i read and wrote too fast - the same mistake some letters to the editor make... oh no! I am happy to be corrected, I thought you'd really lost it this time! Love you!
ReplyDeleteOh, I will give you plenty of warning before I actually "lose it"...
ReplyDelete