Justice?

Three cases are in the news at the moment where the accused/acquitted is being given the Barabbas treatment. It seems that the jury system only works when people are either not bothered with a case or think the verdict was OK.

Niel Entwistle is the man accused of murdering his wife and baby in Massachusetts. Yesterday, his wife's family lawyer, flanked by the extended family, read out a statement that more or less made the jury's deliberations in a forthcoming trial redundant. Obviously helped by the District Attorney's loose tongue, the lawyer laid in on the assumed guilt of Entwistle. I'm surprised he didn't have a rope with him for the lynching!

Sir Roy Meadow is the medical professor who claimed during a baby death case that "the probability of two natural unexplained cot deaths in the family was 73 million to one." This piece of soothsaying was ridiculed by the General Medical Council, but a learned judge has thought otherwise. Sir Roy said, "I am relieved that the court has quashed the GMC's decision. Children can only be protected from abuse if those who suspect abuse are able to give their honest opinion without fear of retribution." This comment seems to imply that he was right and the court of appeal wrong. He is impugning the innocence of the aquitted women!

Thirdly, Sion Jenkins is the teacher who was aquitted of the murder of his foster daughter Billie-Jo, who was also called Jenkins. The girl's natural father seems convinced "it was 'im who done it" and more or less said so on the Radio 4 Today Programme. An aunt of Billie-Jo lashed out in the court building, giving the tabloids something to go on.

So the jury may speak but others who feel wronged, abused, or hurt can go on second guessing or denying the verdict. Not a very satisfactory position to be in!

Truth will out - but what about justice? The jury on this is still out!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4718570.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4720334.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4723012.stm

Posted in: