close

Judicial system should exercise common sense, consistency

3 min read

People have become inured to the inconsistencies and absurdities of the American judicial system. Every day we are stunned by sentences that are patently absurd as either too lenient or too harsh. Chaucer, Shakespeare and even the Bible portrayed lawyers in an unflattering light. However, just when you think the justice system could not possibly be more iniquitous, it rises to the challenge. Several of this summer’s rulings in Greene and Washington counties seemed as if they were right out of a John Grisham novel.

In Waynesburg, a well-connected local politico was given just two years probation for shooting a man in the back.

Not surprisingly, the district attorney (an elected official) said she was satisfied with the verdict and felt it was fair. Just up the road a Washington man, who works for a law firm, was convicted as a child predator, yet received only four years probation from the judge. However, the aforementioned DA did secure a 5- to 36-month jail sentence for a teenager convicted of manslaughter for a fatal traffic accident. Of course, the tragic loss of a young life is devastating to the friends and family of the victim.

They cannot be expected to remain objective when it comes to the tragedy. That is when our judicial system is supposed to use the law, sound logic and detached reasoning to reach a fair disposition of the case.

According to the DA, the crime consisted of two factors, speeding and reaching for a cell phone. While both of these things are foolish and reckless, only one is even against the law in this state. We cannot forget that this recklessness resulted in a terrible tragedy; however, without mitigating the culpability of the teen, we must also consider the absence of intent to do harm to others. It was the illogical conclusion of our judicial system that a teen’s bad judgment is more egregious than an adult firing a gun with the intent to kill or using a computer with the intent to lure minors into sex acts.

It would be naïve to think that judges do not bring personal biases into the courtroom, that district attorneys prosecute by statute rather than for political reasons or that small town rivalries do not taint jury pools. However, it would be nice to think that our judicial system relied, at least in part, on common sense and a modicum of consistency.

Bret Moore

Waynesburg

CUSTOMER LOGIN

If you have an account and are registered for online access, sign in with your email address and password below.

NEW CUSTOMERS/UNREGISTERED ACCOUNTS

Never been a subscriber and want to subscribe, click the Subscribe button below.

Starting at $4.79/week.

Subscribe Today