Because of this, all the other safeguards of the criminal justice system kicked in, from due process to double jeopardy. People at HuffPo and Boing Boing usually like these aspects of the law, except when they don’t. Then they become technicalities and produce injustice, because the outcome doesn’t comport with their sensibilities. Rape is one of the sacred cow crimes, and no law should get in the way of conviction.
It’s all about outcome? As Ken at Popehat points out, people across the political spectrum pick their positions based on outcomes, just different ones. It’s not about thinking, but feeling. The law, however,isn’t about feeling.
(Emphasis mine.) Scott Greenfield – The Future Of Law and The Fool’s Utopia, Rape Edition
October 10, 2012
[I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is no correlation between the law and justice! Seriously folks, realize this right here and now. The point of the law is not just to convict the guilty but to protect the innocent from the power and wrath of the state.
In the end we hope that the law will give some form of justice. However it is also up to the players within the system to aid in that outcome. The prosecution in this case clearly screwed up and charged this person with the wrong crime.
Am I sad that this monster is getting away with the actual crime he did? You bet your ass. Am I angry at the legal system and think it failed? Yes and no. I am angry at the prosecutor for doing a piss poor job, I am not however upset that the rest of the system worked as it should to protect the defendant.
The thing to understand is you cannot have your cake and eat it. While one wants to both protect the innocent and convict the guilty, concessions must be made to protect the innocent. In doing so the possibility for error can allow the guilty to go free.
This isn't a bug folks, it's a feature. A feature that as Scott points out are more than happy to be cheered about by the same people who now condemn it when they feel it was wrong.
Popehat also put this quite well:
If we're going to defend rights — if we're not going to let them be chipped away, bit by bit, in cases involving rape or terrorism or anything else that engenders strong feelings — then we're going to have to be ready to be called terrorist-sympathizers and un-American and even rape apologists by the likes of Antinous. But I can't think of any earthly reason why we can't inform these people that they're full of shit.
Because folks, that's how they do it. They invoke emotion and claim necessity. Some of us are patient, calm, and rational enough to think the whole problem through. Most however would prefer we just "do something" because doing something is better than nothing. Except sometimes doing nothing is actually the best thing to do because someone just screwed the pooch.
More power and depredation of rights is never a solution. -B]